spinner

"Supreme Court Asserts Police Cannot Act as Civil Court for Money Recovery"

Last Updated: 21-02-2024 03:49:46pm

Police do not have the authority to recover money or act as a civil court for recovery of money after civil proceedings fail, the Supreme Court recently said [Lalit Chaturvedi and ors vs State of Uttar Pradesh and anr].A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta explained that there is a clear distinction between a breach of contract and criminal offences.Non-payment of money or breach of contract are civil wrongs that differ from criminal offences, the Court underscored."The police is to investigate the allegations which discloses a criminal act. Police does not have the power and authority to recover money or act as a civil court for recovery of money," the Court observed.The observations came while quashing a criminal complaint and subsequent proceedings against an accused.The chargesheet had alleged criminal breach of trust and criminal intimidation, apart from cheating, after a contract between the accused and the complainant fell through.The High Court refused to set the aside the criminal case leading to the instant appeal before the top court.The apex court at the outset lamented that its judgments regarding differentiating criminal and civil offences were getting overlooked instead of being applied and enforced."It is one thing to say that a case has been made out for trial and criminal proceedings should not be quashed, but another thing to say that a person must undergo a criminal trial despite the fact that no offence has been made out in the complaint," it statedThe chargesheet clearly shows that no criminal case is made out against the instant accused, it added."No details and particulars are mentioned ... In this case entrustment is missing, in fact it is not even alleged. It is a case of sale of goods."The top court noted that the criminal case had been lodged only with an intent to activate police machinery for recovery of money.Initiation of the criminal process for such oblique purposes is bad in law, it underscored. It, thus, set aside the High Court order and quashed all criminal proceedings in the matter.

Also Read

Police's valuable time spent in investigating disputes suited for civil resolution: Supreme Court

Senior Advocate Rajul Bhargava with advocates Atul Kumar, Abhimanyu Sharma, Deepali, Pulak Bagchi, Chander Kiran and Tarun Gupta represented the accused.

Advocates Rajat Singh, Abhishek Singh, Sarthak Chandra and Arun Pratap Singh Rajawat appeared for the Uttar Pradesh government.

Advocates Gautam Das, Sanjeev Kumar Punia, Dhirendra Kumar Jha and Rajinder Singh Chauhan represented the complainant.

TAGS: Supreme Court Police authority Civil court Money recovery Criminal offences Justice Sanjiv Khanna Justice Dipankar Datta


Latest Posts

Karnataka High Court Upholds BDA Land Acquisition, Dismisses Petition Filed 53 Years Later

Karnataka High Court Upholds B...

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoners' Right to Legal Aid in Landmark Ruling

Supreme Court Upholds Prisoner...

Supreme Court’s Verdict in Lalta Prasad Vaish & Sons vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court’s Verdict in L...

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Structure for Artificers in Indian Navy

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Stru...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against HDFC Bank in Locker Operation Dispute

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Agai...

Supreme Court Ruling on Corporate Insolvency Proceedings: Vidyasagar Prasad vs UCO Bank

Supreme Court Ruling on Corpor...

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode's Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court Ruling on Yashod...

Supreme Court Resolves Lease Dispute between Central Warehousing Corporation and Sidhartha Tiles

Supreme Court Resolves Lease D...