Holding

The High Court's order staying the filing of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was erroneous and was set aside.

Summary

The appellant, a partner in a firm, filed a criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 405, 406 and 408 IPC against two former partners. A civil suit for dissolution of the partnership and accounts was simultaneously pending. The respondents moved the Punjab & Haryana High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR, and the High Court stayed the filing of the police’s final report under Section 173 until the civil suit was decided. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the stay misused the inherent powers of the High Court and delayed the criminal trial. The Supreme Court held that the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 is not an unrestricted power and cannot be employed to postpone a criminal investigation merely because a civil suit is pending. Consequently, the stay was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

Issues considered

The scope and limits of the High Court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to stay the filing of a final police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. pending a civil suit.
Whether such a stay serves any purpose consistent with the objectives of the inherent jurisdiction and the right to a speedy trial.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 173, s. 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 405, s. 406, s. 408

Subjects

inherent jurisdictionSection 482 Cr.P.C.Section 173 Cr.P.C.stay of investigationcriminal procedurecivil suit pendencyspeedy trialabuse of process

Judgment

USHA AHUJA A
v.
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

AUGUST 24, 1999

[K. VENKATASWAMI AND B
_.\,
SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, JJ.]

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 482-/nherent power-
Exercise of -High Court staying the filing offinal report on the ground of
pendency of civil suit-Held, stay is erroneous. c
The appellant and respondent no. 2 were partners. Appellant filed a
complaint against respondent nos. 2 and 3 alleging commission of offence
under Sections 405, 406 and 408 of I.P.C. A civil suit was also pending
between the parties for dissolution of the partnership firm and for rendition
of account. The respondents filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before D
the High Court and the High Court, taking note of the pendency of the civil
suit, stayed the filing of final report by the police till the decision of the suit.
The appellant filed an appeal before this Court against the order of the High
Court.
E
Allowing the appeal, this Court.

HELD : I. The width of power of the High Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C., in principle is very expansive but in practice the power is exercised
in exceptional cases. The inherent power of the Court is not an unrestricted
power to make any order which the High Court desires to pass. The power F
is meant to be exercised to give effect to any order under Cr.P.C. or to
prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends
of justice. [675-A)

2. The impugned order serves no useful purpose and it is wholly
extraneous to the purposes for which power is preserved. It is of utmost G
, importance that criminal cases be disposed of expeditiously as right of an
accused to have speedy trial is a right which follows from Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Far from ensuring speedy trial the High Court placed
embargo at the pre-trial stage by staying the filing of final report by the
police under Section 173 Cr.P.C. It is a well-known fact that disposal of a
H
')
673
-
674 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. I S.C.R.

A civil suit takes fairly long time, so no useful purpose will be achieved by
staying the filing of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. by the police
till the disposal of the suit. (675-B, C]

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.
842of1999.
B l
.I
From the Judgment and order dated 17.4.98 of the Punjab & Haranaya
High Court in Crl. M. No. 24679of1997.

Puneet Bali, for Hari Shanker K. for the Appellant.

C R.F. Nariman, (Mahabir Singh) (NP) and S.C. Mahan, Tarun Dua and
K.C. Dua for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by :

SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J. Leave is granted.
D
The appellant and the second respondent were partners of partnership
firm, Mis. Jupiter Industries. A complaint was lodged against the second and
third respondents, FIR No.193, under Sections 405, 406 and 408, IPC at the
Police Station, Mujessar, District Faridabad on July 19, 1996. A Civil Suit is
pending between the parties for dissolution of the partnership firm and
E rendition of accounts. The said respondents filed Criminal Misc.Petition 24679-
M of 1997 before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana praying to quash the
FIR. The High Court by its order dated April 17, 1998, having noticed that
a Civil Suit is pending between the parties and investigation on the complaint
of the appellant by the police is in progress, stayed the filing of the final
F report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. by the police. It is from that order, this appeal
has arisen.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The relevant portion of the impugned order of the High Court reads as
G follows:
,_
"In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to be
reasonable, if the filing of the final report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.
is stayed till the decision of the suit. Ordered accordingly."

H It is now well-settled that the width of power of the High Court under
USHA AHUJA v. STA TE OF HARY ANA [S.S. MOHAMMED QUADRI, J.] 675
Section 482 Cr.P.C., in principle, is very expansive but in practice the power A
is exercised in exceptional cases. The inherent power of the Court is not an
unrestricted power to make any order \\'.hich the High Court desires to pass.
The power is meant to be exercised to give effect to any order under Cr.P.C.
or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the
ends of justice. By passing the impugned order, the High Court did not B
achieve any of the purposes for which the power exists. It does no good to
anybody. It is of utmost importance that criminal cases be disposed of
expeditiously as right of an accused to have speedy trial is a right which flows
from Article 21 of the Constitution. Far from ensuring speedy.Jrial the High
Court placed embargo at the pre-trial stage by staying the filing of final report
by the police under Section 173 Cr.P.c: It is a well- known fact that disposal C
of a civil suit takes fairly long time, so no useful purpose will be achieved
by staying the filing of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. by the police
till the disposal of the suit. The impugned order serves no useful purpose,
nay, it is wholly extraneous to the purposes for which the power is preserved.
In our view, it is most inappropriate to stay the filing of the final report by
the police under Section 173 Cr.P.C. after the police has investigated the case. D
We are, therefore, unable to sustain the order under appeal; we set aside the
same. Let further steps be taken in accordance with law. Appeal is accordingly
allowed.

B.K.M. Appeal allowed.