Trial courts must weigh civil disputes before proceedings with criminal prosecution: Karnataka HC

The Excessive Courtroom of Karnataka has mentioned that trial courts can not ignore the pendency of civil proceedings whereas assessing whether or not criminal prosecution is getting used as a weapon of harassment, and are duty-bound to scrutinise, even on the stage of framing of prices, whether or not the proof genuinely discloses a powerful suspicion and an inexpensive prospect of conviction.

“The criminal legislation can’t be permitted to degenerate right into a weapon of oppression in assist of a civil contest,” the court docket mentioned whereas citing the apex court docket’s observations that criminal legislation can’t be invoked towards residents, within the absence of legally tenable materials, merely as a result of a civil dispute subsists between the events.

Property dispute

Justice M. Nagaprasanna made these observations whereas quashing the criminal instances towards a number of individuals and their advocate by the Bengaluru metropolis police in connection with a criticism lodged towards them in relation to a dispute over transactions of sure properties, the sale deeds of which had been registered 20 years in the past.

A simmering land dispute between the events has been artfully clothed within the robes of criminal prosecution within the full absence of even an iota of criminality, the court docket mentioned whereas declaring that the criminal legislation can’t be permitted to degenerate right into a weapon of oppression in assist of a civil contest.

Two filters

The criminal justice system, the court docket mentioned, must function by way of two filters — first, on the stage of investigation and submitting of a chargesheet, and subsequent, on the stage of framing of cost by the trial court docket. At each phases, the legislation vests ample energy in trial courts to terminate proceedings that quantity to abuse of course of, topic at all times to the peculiar info of every case. It can not ignore the pendency of a civil dispute previous to the initiation of criminal proceedings, the court docket mentioned.

In the meantime, the court docket additionally expressed its deep disquiet over the more and more disturbing development in latest instances of a plethora of instances wherein advocates, who merely signify events before courts of legislation within the discharge of their skilled obligations, are themselves being dragged into criminal proceedings and arrayed as accused.

“If each advocate, merely by a cause of showing for a litigant, is uncovered to criminal prosecution and trauma of investigative proceedings, the inevitable consequence can be a chilling and paralysing impact upon fearless discharge {of professional} obligations,” the court docket mentioned.

The court docket additionally noticed that “the majesty of the authorized career can’t be permitted to be diminished by disgruntled litigants to wield criminal legislation as a weapon of intimidation towards the members of the Bar.”