TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dv., Mr. Prabhakaran, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ma. Gowthaman, Adv., Mr. Thangadurai, adv., Ms. T. Archana, AOR, Mr. A.N. Venugopala Gowda, Sr. Adv., Ms. Garima Jain, Adv., Mr. Gopal Shankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, Adv., Mr. Mohit Singh, AOR, Ms. Aakriti Priya, Adv., Ms. Shiva Krishnamurthy, Adv., Ms. Vaishnavi Subhramanyam, Adv., Ms. Lakshmi Rao, Adv., Ms. Jhanvi Dwivedi, Adv., Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR, Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv., Ms. S. Prabakaran, Sr. Adv., Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv., Mr. Ma. Gouthaman, Adv., Mr. Zaffar Inayat Gani, Adv., Mr. Yusuf, AOR, JUDGMENT V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. Permission to file Special Leave Petition(s) is granted in D.No.11748 of 2022. 2. Leave granted. 3. There are three Special Leave Petitions on hand, two of which challenge an Order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C"), quashing a criminal complaint in CC No.25 of 2021 pending on the file of the Additional Special Court for trial of cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, on the ground that all the victi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Thiru Shanmugam to see Thiru Asok Kumar and Thiru Senthil Balaji in person. Thiru Asok Kumar, who came there, when we gave the amount, had assured that all who have paid amounts would issued with appointment orders. He took us then itself to Thiru Senthil Balaji. He told in an assuring voice that there is no need to worry and all those who gave money would be definitely given appointment orders. In the list of names released by the Transport Corporation, the names of persons for whom I gave money, have not appeared in list of appointments. Hence, persons who gave money to me started pestering me to return the money. When I asked about it to Thiru Rajkumar, he told that in the next list, their names would definitely come. But in the next list also, names of none came. When I informed this to Thiru Rajkumar, he said that he would enquire about the same to Asok Kumar and Shanmugam and then he would say. But each time when I asked Rajkumar, giving me the very same reply, asked me to wait for some time. Persons who gave me money, started threatening me. On their insistence, I gave them my cheques from my savings bank account with Canara Bank, Ambatur Branch, as security. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e final report indicted the persons named as accused, for alleged offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 506(1) read with Section 34 IPC. The Special Court for trial of cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu took the final report on file in CC No.25 of 2021. (iv) Shri Shanmugam, named as accused No.3 then filed a criminal original petition in Criminal O.P. No.13374 of 2021 on the file of the High Court of Judicature at Madras under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying for quashing the criminal complaint CC No.25 of 2021. (v) Before the High Court, the de facto complainant Shri K. Arulmani filed an affidavit supporting the accused and praying for quashing of the final report, on the ground that what the victims had with the accused was only a money dispute and that the same had been settled out of Court and that due to political rivalry between two groups, his complaint got converted into a more serious one, by including unwarranted statements which were not made by him. (vi) The victims who originally claimed to have paid money for procuring employment, also filed individual affidavits supporting the accused....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ruption and abuse of official position and that therefore the charge­sheet could not have been quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties. This application for recall was rejected by the High Court by an Order dated 14.03.2022, primarily on the ground that this Court has already entertained a special leave petition against the order sought to be recalled. (xiii) Therefore, challenging the original order dated 30.07.2011 and the order dated 14.03.2022, the said Association, namely, Anti Corruption Movement has come up with two special leave petitions. 6. Before we proceed further, it is necessary to take note of the fact that there are a few interlocutory applications whose details are as follows: * IA No.49555/2022 filed by Anti Corruption Movement seeking intervention in SLP (Crl.) No.1354 of 2022 filed by Dharamaraj; * IA No.59173/2022 filed by the appellant in SLP (Crl.) No.1354 of 2022, for impleading the four persons named as accused. * IA No.59176/2022 filed by the appellant in SLP (Crl.) No.1354 of 2022 seeking the appointment of a Senior Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor to conduct the trial. * IA Nos.126....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontending inter alia that the statements of the victims did not make out a case for prosecution of the accused under the P.C Act; that this is why the final report filed by the police did not implicate the accused for any offence under the P.C Act; that the prosecution was constrained to include Section 409 IPC only because of a statement as though respondent No.1 was a Personal Assistant to the then Minister (A­1); that however no such order of appointment of respondent No.1 as the Personal Assistant to the Minister was ever brought on record; that in the Additional Affidavit filed by respondent No.1, he categorically denied any association with the Minister as his Personal Assistant; that an attempt was made earlier, by two other individuals who made similar allegations against the then Transport Minister (present A1), by filing petitions in Criminal O.P. (MD) No.14067 and 14967 of 2016, seeking a direction to the police to register a complaint and investigate into the same; that during the pendency of those petitions, a criminal complaint came to be registered in Crime No.15 of 2016; that one of the accused (the Managing Director of the Transport Corporation) immediately fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the behest of individual complainants; that the appellants have taken cudgels on behalf of the political rivals, to undo a compromise reached between a few individual complainants and persons who received money from them; that the parameters laid down by this Court for closing criminal cases on the basis of the compromise reached between parties even in the case of non­compoundable offences, have been followed properly by the High Court in this case; and that since allegations of corruption are not made out in this case, there is no element of public interest involved. According to the learned senior counsel for A­1, the appellants are relying heavily upon other cases filed under the P.C Act, to upset a compromise reached in a case which does not concern allegations under the P.C Act. 12. Shri Manan Kumar Mishra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.1 contended that the attempt of the appellants herein is only to harass the Minister. According to the learned senior counsel, there are two other pending complaints where allegations under the P.C Act are included. The appellants have already impleaded themselves as parties to those criminal complaints. Ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeting held on 06.10.2014 to conduct future recruitments only after inviting applications from the open market through newspaper advertisements apart from getting a list of candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange; (iii) Thereafter, Thiru Senthil Balaji, the then Transport Minister (A­1 in the present case) instructed the officers to collect details regarding the day­to­day progress of the recruitment in all 8 Transport Corporations of the State; (iv) These communications were directed to be transmitted to the Minister's office via e­mail and the mail box was operated and maintained by Shri B. Shanmugam and not by any of the other Personal Assistants of the Minister; (v) The advertisements for recruitment were issued in newspapers on 02.11.2014. Simultaneously, the lists of eligible candidates were also invited from the concerned Employment Exchanges; (vi) A total of 22602 applications were issued to the aspirants during the period from 03.11.2014 to 20.11.2014; (vii) These 22,602 applications related to the posts of Reserved Crew Driver, Reserved Crew Conductor, Junior Tradesman, Junior Engineer and Assistant Engi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t practices adopted by them. Therefore, the public, who are recipients of these services, also become victims, though indirectly, because the consequences of such appointments get reflected sooner or later in the work performed by the appointees. Hence, to say that the appellants have no locus standi, is to deny the existence of what is obvious. 19. The decision in Sanjay Tiwari (supra), relied upon by Shri Mukul Rohtagi, learned senior Counsel for the de facto complainant, is of no application to the case on hand. The appeal in Sanjay Tiwari's case arose out of an application for expediting the trial of a criminal case pending on the file of the Special Judge, Gorakhpur, for alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B IPC and Section 13(1)(c)(d) read with Section 13(2) of P.C. Act. The said application for expediting the trial was moved by a person who was neither the victim nor the accused. Therefore, this Court found out that a person who has nothing to do with the pending trial, cannot seek to expedite the trial, Paragraphs 11 to 15 of the said decision on which heavy reliance is placed read as follows:­ "11. It is well settled that criminal t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich can be collected in Switzerland and to the extent directed in this order shall be made to the Competent Judicial Authorities of the Confederation of Switzerland through filing of the requisite/proper undertaking required by the Swiss law and assurance for reciprocity." 13. A criminal miscellaneous application was filed by Shri H.S. Chowdhary seeking various prayers before the Special Judge which petition was dismissed by the Special Judge. A criminal Revision under Sections 397/482 Cr. P.C. was filed by H.S. Chowdhary in the High Court to quash the order of the Special Judge, which Revision was also dismissed by the High Court. The appeals were filed in this Court by different parties challenging the said order including H.S. Chowdhary. This court while dismissing the appeals filed by the H.S. Chowdhary and others made the following observations: "26. Even if there are million question of law to be deeply gone into and examined in the criminal case of this nature registered against specified accused persons, it is for them and them alone to raise all such questions and challenge the proceedings initiated against them at the appropriate time before the proper ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal trial but in the present case the fact is that proceedings have been initiated by respondent No. 2 who was not concerned with the proceedings is any manner and the respondent No. 2 has no locus to file application which was not clearly maintainable, we are of the view that the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 09.09.2020 cannot be sustained." 20. All that this Court pointed out in paragraph 11 of the decision in Sanjay Tiwari (supra) was that an application for expediting the trial, filed by a person who is in no way connected with the criminal proceeding or criminal trial cannot "ordinarily be entertained by the High Court." 21. The decision in Janata Dal vs. H.S Chowdhary and Others [(1991) 3 SCC 756] cited in paragraphs 12 and 13 of Sanjay Tiwari also has no application to the case on hand. In Janata Dal (supra), which arose out of Bofors case, the Special Court allowed an application of CBI to conduct necessary investigation and to collect necessary evidence, in Switzerland. A letter rogatory was also issued. At that stage an Advocate by name H.S. Chowdhary filed a petition in public interest before the Special Judge, invoking Article 51A of the Constitution. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal against the judgment of the High Court. While rejecting the contention, Hon'ble Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer (as he then was) said in his inimitable style: "......the bogey of busybodies blackmailing adversaries through frivolous invocation of Article 136 is chimerical. Access to Justice to every bona fide seeker is a democratic dimension of remedial jurisprudence even as public interest litigation, class action, pro bono proceedings, etc. We cannot dwell in the home of processual obsolescence when our Constitution highlights social justice as a goal." Therefore, the objection about the locus standi of the appellants is without any merit. In any case, the appellant in one of these appeals, is a victim, as he could not get selected on account of the alleged corrupt practices. Therefore, the contention regarding the locus standi of the appellants is to be rejected. 25. In fact, it is surprising that the de facto complainant Shri Arulmani has raised the question of locus standi. It is seen from his complaint dated 13.08.2018 that he is working in the Technical Wing of the factory of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation. Therefore, he should not have, in the first in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said complaint that in the year 2014, an announcement for filling up vacant posts of Conductor and Driver in the Transport Corporation was issued and that the complainant got introduced to one Mr. Rajkumar. In fact there is also an averment in the complaint that in the first week of January 2015, the complainant went along with the said Rajkumar to the residence of Thiru Senthil Balaji at R.A. Puram and that the amount of Rs.40 lakhs was paid therein to Shri Shanmugam, P.A. to the Minister. The complainant had gone on to state that upon his insistence, he was allowed to meet the Minister and his brother and that the Minister and his brother assured him that all those who gave money would definitely be given appointment orders. 29. It must be recalled that though the FIR came to be registered only on 13.08.2018, it was actually in pursuance of an order passed by the High Court on 16.11.2017 in Crl. O.P. No. 24029 of 2017. Therefore, we are surprised that the FIR did not include the offences under the P.C. Act, 1988. 30. While filing a final report, the Investigation Officer seems to have been little more gracious by including Section 409 IPC, since Sh. Shanmugam, the person ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the PC Act. After the suit was compromised, the Managing Director of the borrower Company sought to get discharged from the complaint. The special Judge (CBI) rejected the application for discharge. The High Court confirmed the same. But this Court reversed the decision of the High Court, solely on the ground that the amount payable to the Bank stood settled. However, it must be noticed that in Nikhil Merchant, the operative portion of the order of this Court merely stated that the criminal proceedings were quashed against the appellant therein. There is no indication therein that the complaint against the officers for offences under the P.C. Act were also quashed. 36. Manoj Sharma (supra) was a case where the offences complained were under Sections 420, 468, 471, 34 read with Section 120B IPC. Though this Court quashed the criminal complaint in the said case also, one of the learned Judges constituting the Bench (Markandey Katju, J.) reserved the question regarding the power of the High Court to quash noncompoundable cases under Section 482 Cr.P.C or Article 226 of the Constitution, on the basis of the compromise reached between the parties, to be decided by a larger bench a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre­dominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically priv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Bureau of Investigation vs. A. Ravishankar Prasad and Others [(2009) 6 SCC 351], the High Court of Bombay quashed the proceedings on the ground that no useful purpose would be served by allowing the matter to proceed for trial. It is interesting to note that Madan Mohan (supra), as seen from the last paragraph of the order, was passed in the peculiar facts of the case. But in so far as A. Ravishankar Prasad (supra) is concerned, the High Court quashed the proceedings on the basis of a settlement reached between the borrowers and the Indian Bank. But the decision of the High Court was over turned, by a two Judge Bench of this Court even after taking note of B.S.Joshi and Nikhil Merchant. In paragraph 46 of its decision, this Court said in A. Ravishankar Prasad :­ "46. Before parting with the case we would like to observe that mere repayment of loan under a settlement cannot exempt the accused from the criminal proceeding in the facts of this case." 40. Therefore, in Vikram Anantrai Doshi (supra), this Court took note of the aforesaid decisions and held in paragraph 26 as follows:­ "26. We are in respectful agreement with the aforesaid view. Be it state....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urageous prudence. As we find in the case at hand the learned Single Judge has not taken pains to scrutinise the entire conspectus of facts in proper perspective and quashed the criminal proceeding. The said quashment neither helps to secure the ends of justice nor does it prevent the abuse of the process of the court nor can it be also said that as there is a settlement no evidence will come on record and there will be remote chance of conviction. Such a finding in our view would be difficult to record. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the social interest would be on peril and the prosecuting agency, in these circumstances, cannot be treated as an alien to the whole case. Ergo, we have no other option but to hold that the order [Vikram Anantrai Doshi v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Application No. 2239 of 2009, order dated 22­4­2010 (Bom)] of the High Court is wholly indefensible. 41. In Parbatbhai Aahir (supra), referred to by the High Court in the impugned order, a 3 member Bench of this Court again summarised the broad principles on this question in paragraph 16. Paragraph 16.6 and 16.8 to 16.10 of the decision read as follows:­ "16.6. In the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o paid money but failed to secure employment. If persons belonging to the 2nd category are allowed to settle their dispute by taking refund of money, the same would affix a seal of approval on the appointment of persons belonging to the 1st category. Therefore, the High Court ought not to have quashed the criminal proceedings on the basis of the compromise. 44. It is needless to point out that corruption by a public servant is an offence against the State and the society at large. The Court cannot deal with cases involving abuse of official position and adoption of corrupt practices, like suits for specific performance, where the refund of the money paid may also satisfy the agreement holder. Therefore we hold that the High Court was completely in error in quashing the criminal complaint. 45. Coming to the next issue regarding the non­inclusion in the final report, of the offences under the P.C. Act, the less said the better. In the counter affidavit filed by the I.O. to the writ petition W.P.No.9061 of 2021, filed by the non­selected candidates, the modus operandi adopted by the accused has been given in detail. We have provided a gist of the contents of such counter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spondents is that there are two other cases where allegations of corruption are made and that CC No.25 of 2021 with which we are concerned now, did not involve allegations of corruption. But the said contention is abhorring, for the simple reason that all criminal complaints arose out of the very same cash­for­job scam. We are informed that the proceedings in respect of those two cases have also been stayed by the High Court. We do not know how the High Court could have stayed prosecution of persons under the P.C. Act, especially in matters of this nature. 48. As a matter of fact, the State ought to have undertaken a comprehensive investigation into the entire scam, without allowing the accused to fish out one case as if it was a private money dispute. 49. The reliance placed by the respondents on an order passed by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on an earlier occasion in Criminal O.P.(MD)Nos.14067, 140967, 16023 of 2016, will not have bearing upon the present complaints. In fact, the SLP filed by a 3rd party against the order passed in those petitions was dismissed by this Court on 05.01.2017 even at the stage of permission to file SLP. Therefore the resp....