REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1592 OF 2023

(@ SLP (CRL.) NO. 6688 OF 2017)

CHANCHALPATI DAS …APPELLANT

VERSUS

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. …RESPONDENTS

WITH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1593 OF 2023

(@SLP (CRL.) NO. 6689 OF 2017)

MADHUPANDIT DAS …APPELLANT

VERSUS

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. …RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

BELA M. TRIVEDI, J.

1.Leave granted.

1 2023 INSC 554

2.Both the appeals arise out of the common judgment and order

dated 22.03.2017 passed by the High Court at Kolkata in CRR No.

1490 of 2013 and CRR. No. 3307 of 2013 whereby the High Court

has dismissed both the Criminal Revision Applications seeking

quashing of the charge-sheet filed against the appellants-accused,

in respect of the FIR no. 33 of 2009 registered at Ballygunge

Police Station, for the offences under Sections 468, 471, 406 and

120-B of IPC. As transpiring from the record, the appellant Madhu

Pandit Das (accused no.1) is the President of ISKCON, Bengaluru

since 1984 and the appellant Chanchalpati Das (accused no. 2) is

the Vice President of ISKCON, Bengaluru since 1985. Both of

them claim to be the global spiritual leaders and humanitarians.

According to the appellants, the International Society for Krishna

Consciousness (ISKCON), Bengaluru, is a society registered in

1978 under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

3.As per the case of the respondent-complainant on 30.09.2006, a

letter in the form of complaint was addressed to the officer in

charge, Ballygunge Police Station, Kolkata, by the General

Manager, ISKCON, Kolkata, in which it was alleged inter alia that

the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON),

Mumbai is a Society registered since 1971 under the Societies

Registration Act, 1860 and Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, having

2

its registered office at Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Mumbai-49. The

said Society has many branches/offices all over India including

one located at 3C, Albert Road, Kolkata- 700019. The Governing

Council of the said Society known as “Bureau” is the highest

administrative body. The said Bureau at the relevant time had

entrusted Sri Adridharan Das, who was the President of the said

Kolkata Branch, with the management of the assets and properties

situated at Kolkata Branch, which included a 42-seat deluxe bus of

Ashok Leyland make, model Viking Alpsv 4/37-222 WB passenger

bus, bearing registration no. WB25A-0454, engine No. WSH

104189, chassis No. WSH042296. The said bus used to be parked

at the premises of Kolkata Branch.

4.It was further alleged that when the new management took over

the management of the said branch at Kolkata, the said bus was

not found in the premises of the said branch. Therefore, Sri

Jagdartiha Das, one of the Managers wrote a letter dated 23

rd

November, 2001 to the Regional Transport Officer, Barasat,

Kolkata not to issue any duplicate registration certificate, tax card

etc. in respect of the said bus. It was further stated in the said

letter dated 30

th

September, 2006 that a report was also made to

the police station on 22.05.2002, however subsequently they came

to know that the said bus was in the illegal custody of Sri Madhu

3

Pandit Das, residing at Hare Krishna HilIs, Rajaji Nagar,

Bengaluru, Karnataka. It was also alleged that Mr. Adridharan Das

had entered into a criminal conspiracy with Mr. Madhu Pandit Das

and others, and that Mr. Adridharan Das had committed theft as

well as criminal breach of trust in respect of the said vehicle, which

was taken to Bengaluru. It was also alleged that the original

registration certificate of the said vehicle was lying at the Kolkata

Branch, and that neither Mr. Adridharan Das nor Mr. Madhu Pandit

Das or any other person had any authority to get the said vehicle

transferred to Bengaluru or to change the name of the registered

owner of the said vehicle.

5.It is further case of the respondent-complainant that since the

Ballygunge Police Station had not taken notice of the said letter

dated 30.09.2006, the complainant Radha Raman Das, the Branch

Manager of ISKCON, Kolkata had filed a private complaint in the

year 2009 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, against

the accused Madhu Pandit Das, Chanchalpati Das, Mahajan Das

and Adridharan Das seeking investigation under Section 156(3) of

Cr.P.C. The said case was registered as criminal case no. 747 of

2009 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore.

6.It appears that the said Court Petition under Section 156(3) of

Cr.P.C was registered as FIR being no. 33 at the Ballygunge

Police Station on 20.02.2009 for the offences under Section 379/

4

411/ 406/ 408/ 120-B/ 468/ 471 IPC. The investigating officer on

the completion of investigation submitted the charge-sheet being

no. 58 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore against the

accused Madhu Pandit Das, Chanchalpati Das, Mahajan Das and

Adridharan Das, for the offences under Section 468, 471, 406 and

120-B IPC on 23.10.2010.

7.The appellant-accused Chanchalpati Das filed a petition being

CRR No. 1490 of 2013 and the appellant-accused Madhu Pandit

Das filed a petition being CRR No. 3307/2013 before the High

Court of Kolkata seeking quashing of proceedings of criminal case

no. 747 of 2009 pending before the CJM, Alipore. The High Court

vide the common impugned judgement and order dismissed both

the Criminal Revisions.

8.The learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shyam Divan for the appellants

vehemently submitted that the prosecution initiated against the

appellants by the respondent-complainant was only an attempt to

harass the appellants under the guise of the bus theft case to

settle the personal scores with appellants, as the appellants were

able to create around 30 ISKCON/Hare Krishna Movement

associated Centres under the aegis of ISKCON Bengaluru, who

follow the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, by keeping him as the

sole Diksha Acharya. He further submitted that the allegations in

the complaint/FIR are not only absurd and improbable, but there is

5

no reasonable possibility of the appellants being convicted for the

alleged offences after the trial. Relying upon the documents with

regard to the transfer of registration of the bus in question, he

submitted that the said bus was registered at Kolkata on

20.11.1998, however thereafter was registered at Bengaluru on

22.05.2002 after the execution of necessary documents of transfer

and at present the bus is lying in the dump yard at Vrindavan,

Uttar Pradesh. According to him, filing of an FIR in 2009 for the

alleged theft of bus taken place in 2002, was sheer abuse of

process of law. Even the Investigating Officer has failed to collect

and produce any documents or evidence along with the charge-

sheet with regard to the alleged forgery and fabrication of

documents. Mr. Diwan has placed reliance on the decisions in

State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors.

1

, in G.

Sagar Suri and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.

2

, in Madhavrao

Jiwajirao Scindia and Ors. Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao

Angre and Ors.

3

, in Subal Ghorai and Ors. vs. State of West

Bengal

4

to buttress his submissions. Lastly, he submitted that to

put a quietus in the matter, the ISKCON Bengaluru is ready and

1 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335

2 (2000) 2 SCC 636

3 (1988) 1 SCC 692

4 2013 (4) SCC 607

6

willing to purchase a latest model brand new Ashok Leyland bus in

the name of ISKCON Kolkata directly.

9.Per contra, learned Senior Advocate Mr. K. Venugopal appearing

on behalf of respondent no. 2-complainant submitted that both the

appellants have been charged by the respondent no. 1 State for

the offence under Sections 468, 471, 406 and 120-B IPC as per

the final report submitted by the investigating officer and there

being a prima facie case made out against the appellants, which

even the High Court had recorded in the impugned order, this

Court may not interfere with the same. According to him, the

documents of registration produced by the appellants, claiming to

have been received under the RTI from the concerned Regional

Transport Authority, Bengaluru, have been produced for the first

time before this Court and the same could not be taken into

consideration. He further submitted that the underlying complaint

pertained to only one luxury bus in comparison to the huge

business empire including real estate built by the appellant-

accused, cannot detract from, or minimise the gravity of the

offences of forgery, cheating and breach of trust allegedly

committed by the appellants. He also submitted that the proposal

of appellants-accused to give a new bus to ISKCON Kolkata

cannot be accepted, as the offences alleged against the appellants

7

are not compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Mr. Venugopal

has placed reliance on the decisions in Central Bureau of

Investigation Vs. Maninder Singh

5

; State of Gujarat Vs.

Gajanand M. Dalwadi (Dead) by LRS.

6

; Jasbir Singh vs. Tara

Singh and Ors.

7

; Jagdish Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

8

;

Kaptan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.

9

; Central

Bureau of Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna

10

in support of his

submissions that the criminal proceedings against the appellants

may not be quashed.

10.Having gone through the pleadings of the parties and the

documents on record and having anxiously considered the

submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it

emerges that according to the complainant-respondent, a letter in

the form of complaint was written by the Branch Manager of the

ISKCON Kolkata, on 30.09.2006 addressed to the officer in-

charge, Ballygunge Police Station, Kolkata, in respect of an

alleged theft of a bus having taken place in 2001, however, no

action was taken by the said police station. Though, the

complainant had reported the matter to the concerned Police

Station earlier on 22

nd

May, 2002, however, no action was taken in

5 (2016) 1 SCC 389

6 (2008) 1 SCC 716

7 (2016) 16 SCC 441

8 (2004) 4 SCC 432

9 (2021) 9 SCC 35

10 (2019) 10 SCC 686

8

that regard. It is pertinent to note that with regard to the said

allegations against the concerned police station, there is nothing

on record to suggest that either the said report dated 22.05.2002

or the letter dated 30.09.2006 was ever received by the concerned

police station or any follow up action was taken by the respondent-

complainant in that regard. According to the respondent-

complainant, since no action was taken on the letter dated 30

th

September, 2006 written to the concerned Police Station, the

complaint was lodged in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Alipore on 10

th

February, 2009, which was registered as C.R. Case

No. 747 of 2009, seeking investigation under Section 156(3) of

Cr.P.C.

11.It is again pertinent to note that, even as per the case of the

complainant, the alleged incident of bus theft had taken place in

the year 2001, and it was only in 2009 that the substantial

complaint was made in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Alipore. It is just not believable that the concerned Ballygunge

Police Station, Kolkata would not have taken any action on the

report made in 2002 on behalf of the powerful body like the

ISKCON Kolkata, or on the letter dated 30.09.2006 written by the

Branch Manager of the ISKCON, Kolkata. The respondent no. 2-

complainant also did not take any concrete action for getting the

9

said complaint registered with regard to the alleged theft of bus for

a long period of eight years, till the complaint in the Court was filed

in the year 2009. In the opinion of the Court such an inordinate

delay of eight years in filing the complaint in the court itself would

be a sufficient ground to quash the proceedings. If the luxury bus

owned by the ISKCON, Kolkata Branch in 1998 was so precious to

them, they would not have sat silent for such a long time of eight

years. In our opinion, the criminal machinery set into motion by

filing the complaint for the alleged incident which had taken place

eight years ago, that act itself was nothing but a sheer misuse and

abuse of the process of the court.

12.That apart, from the bare perusal of the complaint filed before the

Court, on the basis of which the FIR was registered at the

Ballygunge Police Station on 20

th

February, 2009, it is discernible

that except bald allegations made in the complaint with regard to

the theft of bus in question there was no material or document

produced by the complainant to substantiate the allegations

against the appellants. Even after the investigation of the said

complaint, there was no evidence collected by the investigating

officer to prima facie satisfy the ingredients constituting the alleged

offences under Sections 468, 471, 406 and 120B of IPC. Even if

the allegations made in the complaint as well as in the

10

Chargesheet are taken at their face value none of the ingredients

constituting the alleged offences are culled out. The learned

Senior Counsel Mr. Shyam Divan for the appellants had

strenuously urged relying upon the documents pertaining to the

transfer of ownership and registration of the said bus, that the said

documents were executed by the then authorized persons of the

ISKCON Kolkata, in our opinion, the said documents could not be

considered in these proceedings, the same being not the part of

the charge-sheet papers. In any case, there is nothing to suggest

from the other documents on record of the instant appeals that the

investigating officer had even bothered to collect any cogent or

substantive evidence against the appellants to prosecute them for

the alleged offences. There was no expert opinion obtained or

scientific evidence collected on the documents allegedly forged to

show as to by whom, when and how the theft of vehicle and

forgery of documents were committed. Under the circumstances,

allowing such prosecution to continue would not only be an empty

formality but would be gross wastage of court’s precious time.

13.It cannot be gainsaid that the High Courts have power to quash

the proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of process of any Court or otherwise

to secure the ends of justice. Though the powers under Section

11

482 should be sparingly exercised and with great caution, the said

powers ought to be exercised if a clear case of abuse of process

of law is made out by the accused. In the State of Karnataka Vs.

L. Muniswamy and Ors.

11

had held that the criminal proceedings

could be quashed by the High Court under Section 482 if the court

is of the opinion that allowing the proceedings to continue would

be an abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of justice

require that the proceedings are to be quashed.

14.This Court, way back in 1992 in the landmark decision in case of

State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal and Ors (Supra), after

considering relevant provisions more particularly Section 482 of

the Cr.P.C. and the principles of law enunciated by this Court

relating to the exercise of extra-ordinary powers under Article 226,

had laid down certain guidelines for the exercise of powers of

quashing, which have been followed in umpteen number of cases.

The relevant part thereof reads as under:

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various

relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the

principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of

decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power

under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482

of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above,

we give the following categories of cases by way of

illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to

prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to

secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to

lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently

channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to

give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such

power should be exercised.

11 (1977) 2 SCC 699

12

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report

or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value

and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute

any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and

other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose

a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police

officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an

order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of

the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or

complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same

do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out

a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a

cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable

offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer

without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under

Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are

so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which

no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that

there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of

the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which

a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and

continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a

specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing

efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with

mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously

instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on

the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and

personal grudge.”

15.In State of A.P. Vs. Golconda Linga Swamy & Another

12

this

Court had observed that the Court would be justified to quash the

proceedings if it finds that initiation or continuance of such

proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court.

12 2004 (6) SCC 522

13

16.As regards inordinate delay in filing the complaint it has been

recently observed by this Court in Hasmukhlal D. Vora & Anr. vs.

State of Tamil Nadu

13

that though inordinate delay in itself may

not be a ground for quashing of a criminal complaint, however

unexplained inordinate delay must be taken into consideration as a

very crucial factor and ground for quashing a criminal complaint.

17.In the light of afore-stated legal position, if the facts of the case are

appreciated, there remains no shadow of doubt that the complaint

filed by the respondent-complainant after an inordinate

unexplained delay of eight years was nothing but sheer misuse

and abuse of the process of law to settle the personal scores with

the appellants, and that continuation of such malicious prosecution

would also be further abuse and misuse of process of law, more

particularly when neither the allegations made in the complaint nor

in the chargesheet, disclose any prima facie case against the

appellants. The allegations made against the appellants are so

absurd and improbable that no prudent person can ever reach to a

conclusion that there is a sufficient ground for proceeding against

the appellants-accused.

18.Before parting, a few observations made by this Court with regard

to the misuse and abuse of the process of law by filing false and

frivolous proceedings in the Courts need to be reproduced. In the

13 2022 SCC Online SC 1732

14

Court. In Dalip Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

14

it

was observed that:

“1. For many centuries Indian society cherished two

basic values of life i.e. “satya” (truth) and “ahimsa”

(non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma

Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in

their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of the

justice-delivery system which was in vogue in the pre-

Independence era and the people used to feel proud to

tell truth in the courts irrespective of the

consequences. However, post-Independence period

has seen drastic changes in our value system. The

materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the

quest for personal gain has become so intense that

those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take

shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and

suppression of facts in the court proceedings.”

19.In Subrata Roy Sahara vs. Union of India and Others

15

it was

observed as under:

“191. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted

with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be

evolved to deter litigants from their compulsive

obsession towards senseless and ill-considered

claims.”

20.We would like to add that just as bad coins drive out good coins

from circulation, bad cases drive out good cases from being heard

on time. Because of the proliferation of frivolous cases in the

courts, the real and genuine cases have to take a backseat and

are not being heard for years together. The party who initiates and

continues a frivolous, irresponsible and senseless litigation or who

14 (2010) 2 SCC 114

15 (2014) 8 SCC 470

15

abuses the process of the court must be saddled with exemplary

cost, so that others may deter to follow such course. The matter

should be viewed more seriously when people who claim

themselves and project themselves to be the global spiritual

leaders, engage themselves into such kind of frivolous litigations

and use the court proceedings as a platform to settle their

personal scores or to nurture their personal ego.

21.Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case

and for the reasons stated hereinabove, we deem it appropriate to

quash the criminal proceedings pending against the appellants in

the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, arising out of the

FIR No. 33 of 2009 registered at Ballygunge Police Station, and

quash the same.

22.The appeals stand allowed, with cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- which shall

be deposited by the respondent-complainant in the office of the

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association.

..………………………. J.

[AJAY RASTOGI]

…..................................J.

[BELA M. TRIVEDI]

NEW DELHI

18.05.2023

16

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SLP (Crl) NO. 4539 OF 2023

MADHUPANDIT DAS ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS

WITH

SLP (Crl) NO. 4603 OF 2023

CHANCHALPATI DAS ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

BELA M. TRIVEDI, J.

1.Both the petitions arise out of the order dated 17.02.2023 passed

by the High Court at Kolkata in CRR 4062 of 2022 whereby the

High Court has directed the concerned Judicial Magistrate at

Alipore to specifically fix the date for consideration of the charge

within one month from the date of communication of order and

further to conclude the trial within ten months taking recourse to

the provision contained in Section 309 of Cr.P.C.

1

2.In view of the judgment passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal

No. 1592 of 2023 (@ SLP (CRL.) NO. 6688 OF 2017) & Criminal

Appeal No. 1593 of 2023 (@SLP (CRL.) NO. 6689 OF 2017), the

present petitions do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly.

..………………………. J.

[AJAY RASTOGI]

…..................................J.

[BELA M. TRIVEDI]

NEW DELHI

18.05.2023

2