Allowed

Sadaf Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2024/3474/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an order rejecting a discharge petition. The High Court held that the trial court erred in relying solely on suspicion to frame charges against the applicant, citing Supreme Court precedents requiring grave suspicion. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 14.06.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial court to decide the discharge application afresh.

Sadaf Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31703

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3474 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sadaf Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rishad Murtaza,Aishwarya Mishra,Arnnav Prakash Tikku,Syed Ali Jafar Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Rishad Murtaza, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Alok Tiwari, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the impugned order dated 14.06.2023 vide which the discharge application moved by the applicant is rejected in Criminal Case No.86857 of 2022: Crime No.154 of 2021 under Sections 406, 419, 420 IPC, 66D of the Information Technology Act, Police Station Aliganj, Lucknow.

¶7

3. It is alleged in the prosecution case that according to the FIR/recovery memo, a team of the complainant on 02.08.2021 comprising Sub-Inspector Amit Sahu along with other police constables was doing some work and search regarding a gang, who was involved in running forged call centres and collecting details of innocent people on the pretext of providing them jobs. On information from A.D.C.P., a team was constituted and raided a call centre, which run in a complex situated in Aliganj and thereafter a recovery memo was prepared on 02.08.2021 at 22:25 and thereafter lodged report under Sections 406, 419, 420 IPC, 66D IT Act, Police Station Aliganj, Lucknow.

¶8

4. A charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant only under Section 420 IPC. However, against rest of the accused persons, it was submitted under Sections 406, 419, 420 IPC, 66D of the Information Technology Act on 13.09.2022.

¶9

5. Earlier, the applicant has approached this Court by filing

¶10

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.3610 of 2023: Sadaf Khan vs State of U.P. & Ors, wherein a direction was issued to the applicant to move a discharge application vide order dated 17.04.2023 by a coordinate Bench of this Court. Accordingly, a discharge application was filed before the trial court in compliance of the order dated 17.04.2023. Said application has been rejected vide impugned order dated 14.06.2023.

¶11

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that necessary ingredients of cheating as provided under Section 415 IPC are missing. There is lack of intention to cheat at the time of commission of offence, which is an essential ingredient to attract the charge of cheating.

¶12

7. Contents of the FIR clearly indicate that the applicant and other girls were only given jobs of calling the customers from a database provided by the owner of the company, Anuj Kumar Pal. The applicant only used to call customers and enquire if the person was interested in job and if the answer was in affirmative, he was supposed to ask to fill a form online. He submits that there is no fraudulent transaction of any money. There is no victim in this case, who has come forward. There is no inducement neither any monetary benefit has been accrued to the applicant.

¶13

8. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposes the application and has submitted that the applicant has made false representation, she had prior knowledge that the representation he made was false and the accused made false representation with dishonest intention in order to deceive the person to whom it was made.

¶14

9. Perused the record.

¶15

10. Bare reading of Section 415/420 IPC depicts following ingredients are must to attract the offence of cheating:-

¶16

(i) deception of any person;

¶17

(ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any

¶18

property; and

¶19

(iii) intentionally inducing a person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and the act or omission caused or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property.

¶20

11. Learned Court below while rejecting the discharge application has given following findings:-

¶21

"उपररो्ሹ वविधधि व्यविस्थथाओओं ससे यह वविवदित हहै वकि आररोप वविरचन किसे स्तर पर ममुख्यततः अवभियरोजन दथारथा दिथाधखिल ्ቚपतኘ᭖ किथा अविलरोकिन इस स्तर तकि वकियथा जथानथा आविश्यकि हहै वकि विह ्ቚथम दृ्ቖयथा अपरथाधि हरोनथा सथावबित किरतथा हरो , आररोप किसे स्तर पर यह आविश्यकि नहीሻ वकि उपलब्धि अवभियरोजन सथाቌኚयኘ᭖ किकी सच्चथाई इस स्तर तकि दिसेखिखी जथायसे , जरो अवभियमु्ሹथा किकी दिरोष धसवቍኌ किसे धलयसे पयथा቟ኋ्቎ हरो। मथाननखीय उच्चतम न्यथायथालय दथारथा अन्य वविधधि व्यविस्थथाओओं मम यह ्ቚवतपथावदित वकियथा गयथा हहै वकि मथात शकि किसे आधिथार पर भिखी आररोप वविरवचत वकियथा जथा सकितथा हहै। ्ቚस्तमुत मथामलसे मम वविविसेचकि दथारथा किसेस डथायरखी मम अओंवकित बियथानኘ᭖ मम भिखी यह अओंवकित वकियथा गयथा हहै वकि उन्हम हरो रहखी घटनथा किकी जथानकिथारखी अखिबिथार वि अन्य मथाध्यमኘ᭖ ससे वमलखी थखी . धजसमम किमुछ लरोग फजቌኍ किथाल ससेन्टर चलथा रहसे थसे तथथा ननौकिरखी दिसेनसे किसे बिहथानसे तथथा इण्टरव्यय लसेनसे किसे बिहथानसे लरोगኘ᭖ किसे ए०टखी०एम० किकी वडटसेल , सखी०विखी०विखी० नम्बिर जथान लसेतसे थसे तथथा धिरोखिथाधिडखी ससे पहैससे वनकिथाल लसेतसे थसे। अवभियमु्ሹथा किथा यह आकसेप वकि वकिसखी पखीवडत दथारथा किरोई ररपरोट቟ኋ नहीሻ किकी गयखी , वनरथाधिथार हहै। चयओंवकि आपरथाधधिकि मथामलसे किथा सओंजथान पमुधलस वकिसखी भिखी मथाध्यम ससे वमलखी सयचनथा ससे लसे सकितखी हहै। मथामलसे मम विथादिखी ममुकिदिनथा वनरखीककि तसेज बिहथादिमुर धसओंह दथारथा अपनसे बियथान किमस डथायरखी सओंख्यथा -2 वदिनथाओंवकित -10.08.2021 मम भिखी यह किथन वकियथा हहै वकि समस्त अवभियमु्ሹगण दथारथा वगरफफ तथारखी हरोनसे पर यह किथन वकियथा गयथा वकि उनकिसे दथारथा लरोगኘ᭖ किरो ननौकिरखी डथाट किथाम बितथाकिर फरोन वकियथा जथातथा थथा , धजसससे लरोग उन पर वविश्विथास किर सकिसे। जहथाओं तकि अवभियमु्ሹथा किथा यह किथन वकि वकिसखी स्वितओंत सथाकखी किथा बियथान अओंवकित नहीሻ वकियथा गयथा हहै . तरो आररोप किसे स्तर पर मथामलसे किथा पयण቟ኋ अविलरोकिन आविश्यकि नहीሻ हहै। अततः उपररो्ሹ वविश्लसेषण तथथा वविधधि व्यविस्थथाजኘ᭖ किसे आलरोकि मम यह नहीሻ किहथा जथा सकितथा वकि अवभियमु्ሹथा सदिफ हर सओंभिवि सस्थवत मम उन्मरोवचत हरोनसे यरोग्य हहै। अत . ्ቚथाधथ቟ኋनखी / अवभियमु्ሹथा सदिफ दथारथा ्ቚस्तमुत उन्मरोचन ्ቚथाथ቟ኋनथापत वनरस्त वकियसे जथानसे यरोग्य हहै।

¶22

आदिसेश्ቚ

¶23

थाधथ቟ኋनखी / अवभियमु्ሹथा सदिफ दथारथा ्ቚस्तमुत उन्मरोचन ्ቚथाथ቟ኋनथापत वनरस्त वकियथा जथातथा हहै। अवभियमु्ሹथा रूवच वतविथारखी वि पयजथा चनौरधसयथा किरो विथास्तसे उन्मरोचन ्ቚथाथ቟ኋनथापत बिहस अओंवतम अविसर वदियथा जथातथा हहै तथथा शसेष अवभियमु्ሹगण किकी हथाधजरखी हसेतमु पतथाविलखी

¶24

वदिनथाओंकि -15.07.2023 किरो पसेश हरो।"

¶25

12. Perusal of the order of the learned court below shows that it was of the opinion that only on the basis of suspicion, charges can be made, which finding is contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sajjan Kumar vs Central Bureau of Investigation : (2010) 9 SCC 368, in para 21 of which the Supreme Court has defined scope of Section 227/228 of the Code and laid down following principles:-

¶26

"21. On consideration of the authorities about the scope of Sections 227 and 228 of the Code, the following principles emerge:

¶27

(i) The Judge while considering the question of framing the charges under Section 227 CrPC has the undoubted power to sift and weigh the evidence for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused has been made out. The test to determine prima facie case would depend upon the facts of each case.

¶28

(ii) Where the materials placed before the court disclose grave suspicion against the accused which has not been properly explained, the court will be fully justified in framing a charge and proceeding with the trial.

¶29

(iii) The court cannot act merely as a post office or a mouthpiece of the prosecution but has to consider the broad probabilities of the case, the total effect of the evidence and the documents produced before the court, any basic infirmities, etc. However, at this stage, there cannot be a roving enquiry into the pros and cons of the matter and weigh the evidence as if he was conducting a trial.

¶30

(iv) If on the basis of the material on record, the court could form an opinion that the accused might have committed offence, it can frame the charge, though for conviction the conclusion is required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the offence.

¶31

(v) At the time of framing of the charges, the probative value of the material on record cannot be gone into but before framing a charge the court must apply its judicial mind on the material placed on record and must be satisfied that the commission of offence by the accused was possible.

¶32

(vi) At the stage of Sections 227 and 228, the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record

¶33

with a view to find out if the facts emerging therefrom taken at their face value disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence. For this limited purpose, sift the evidence as it cannot be expected even at that initial stage to accept all that the prosecution states as gospel truth even if it is opposed to common sense or the broad probabilities of the case.

¶34

(vii) If two views are possible and one of them gives rise to suspicion only, as distinguished from grave suspicion, the trial Judge will be empowered to discharge the accused and at this stage, he is not to see whether the trial will end in conviction or acquittal."

¶35

13. Perusal of the 2nd and 7th principles shows that when the material placed before the Court shows grave suspicion against an accused, which has not been properly explained, the Court may be justified in framing the charge and proceeding with the trial. Without there being any grave suspicion, trial judge shall be empowered to discharge the accused.

¶36

14. Perusal of the aforesaid finding given by the trial court shows that mere on the basis of suspicion, the discharge application has been rejected.

¶37

15. Hence, considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Sajjan Singh (supra) and MNG Bharateesh Reddy vs Ramesh Ranganathan & Anr: Criminal Appeal No.1273 of 2022 , after due consideration of the submissions advanced, and perusal of the record, I am of the view that the finding recorded by the learned court below that only on the basis of suspicion the charge can be framed, is erroneous and contrary to the settled law, therefore, the impugned order dated 14.06.2023 is set aside.

¶38

16. The application is allowed .

¶39

17. The matter is remanded back to the trial court to decide the application for discharge afresh.

¶40

Order Date :- 23.4.2024 prateek

¶41

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sadaf Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadaf Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sunil Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Akshay Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Anupam Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Samujh Jaiswal and Anr. vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Anr.

Pradeep Kumar Dixit vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mohammad Tarique Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 2 Others