
High Courts can't quash FIR when larger economic offences are manifest: Supreme Court
NEW DELHI: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has ordered that the High Courts can't quash the FIR when larger economic offences are manifest, even if there is a civil transaction history between parties.
"Financial frauds need deeper scrutiny and cannot be brushed off as civil disputes. Dummy firms, suspected conspiracy etc. warranted probe," said, a two-judge Bench of the apex court, led by Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Prasanna B Varale, in an order recently.
The bench of the top court passed the judgement on hearing a case involving Dinesh Sharma against a company.
Lawyer and Advocate on Record (AOR), Krishnamohan Menon, appearing for the appellant, Sharma, said this ruling, lays down the principle that-financial disputes involving manifest fraudulent intent or larger Economic Offense should not be dismissed as mere civil matters without proper investigation, even if there is civil/commercial transaction history between the parties.
Setting aside the Rajasthan HC order, which quashed the FIR, against the company -- Emgee Cables and Communication Ltd -- the top court said, the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case warrants thorough investigation as there was a huge amount involved.
"It is true that there is a growing tendency of parties to rope in their counterparts to harass and extract monetary transaction. It is the duty of the Court to consider the facts of each case, in its proper perspective and then to arrive at the conclusion as to whether the case warrants investigation or the proceedings are required to be quashed. The peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case warrant a thorough investigation as there was a huge amount involved," said the SC in its order.
The judgment underscores the importance of judicial scrutiny in cases where financial misconduct is alleged, ensuring that criminal liability is not evaded under the guise of contractual disputes.
The Apex Court, while doing so, has drawn an exception to the general principle that FIRs (First Information Reports) can be quashed when the Civil/Commercial transaction history between the parties indicates that the dispute is of a civil nature.
The SC has held that if Economic Offences in the form of creation of shell companies to siphon money and materials is clear from connected FIR (S), the Enforcement Directorate Orders or otherwise from the records, the intention to cheat is manifest and the High Court cannot quash an FIR filed alleging under Section 420 (Cheating) of the Indian Penal and (IPC) and other sections of the law.
Reversing the Order of the Rajasthan HC which had quashed the Subject FIR filed by the Appellant-supplier (Dinesh Sharma) against the accused Respondent-buyers, the top court said, "Financial frauds demand a higher degree of judicial scrutiny, given their far-reaching consequences on the economy, investors, and financial institutions. Thus, when an accused is engaged in conduct akin to financial fraud, courts must be cautious and weigh all material circumstances before exercising their power under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings."
Restoring the criminal proceedings, against the company -- Emgee Cables and Communication Ltd -- the top court said, the HC cannot ignore material produced before it and proceed only on the premise of civil/commercial transaction history between the parties.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hans India
38 minutes ago
- Hans India
Property owners upset over new BBMP E-Khata move
Bengaluru: The BBMP has issued an order that e-Khata will be mandatory for building construction in Bengaluru from now on. BBMP Chief Commissioner Maheshwar Rao has issued an order that e-Khata will be mandatory for obtaining building plans from July 1. The Corporation, which had already given a shock by disconnecting electricity connections to unauthorised buildings as per the Supreme Court order, has now given another shock by making e-Khata mandatory for new building construction. Online application submission and distribution arrangements have been made for building plan approval within the BBMP area. In addition, e-Khata is being issued for properties online. Now, both the software are being integrated. Therefore, those applying for building plan approval must first obtain an e-Khata. It has been made mandatory for those applying for plan approval to enter the e-Khata or EPID number in the software and submit the e-Khata. Meanwhile, only 5 lakh e-Khatas have been distributed so far, and lakhs of owners still need to obtain e-Khata. Meanwhile, property owners are expressing anger over this order of BBMP. 5 lakh e-Khatas have been distributed so far in the BBMP area. Now more than 25 lakh draft e-Khatas are available online. About 3,000 people are doing this process every day. However, the order making e-Khata mandatory from July 1 has caused hardship to property owners. Currently, it remains to be seen whether the corporation, which has issued a sudden order for e-Khata to be mandatory, will postpone the deadline.


Deccan Herald
2 hours ago
- Deccan Herald
Cash discovery row: Cong asks govt to share SC report on allegations against Justice Varma
Though the judge, who was later transferred to the Allahabad High Court, has claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement.


Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
SC refuses more time for Congress MLA to surrender in BJP leader murder case
The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea by Karnataka Congress legislator and former minister Vinay R Kulkarni seeking an extension of time to surrender, a week after his bail was cancelled in connection with the 2016 murder of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Yogesh Gowda. A bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan declined to entertain the request made by Kulkarni's counsel, who urged the court to grant the sitting legislator at least a week's extension to comply with the June 6 order. Also Read: Can't jail someone for interfaith union: SC bail for Muslim man 'He is a sitting MLA and also the chairman of the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board,' submitted the counsel, requesting the bench to show indulgence and give him at least a week more. The court remained unmoved. 'No. You surrender as per this court's order. The request is rejected,' said the bench, affirming the directive that Kulkarni must surrender within one week of the June 6 ruling. The top court had earlier cancelled the bail granted to Kulkarni after finding that he had violated its conditions by influencing key witnesses during the ongoing trial. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is probing the case, presented material showing that Kulkarni had attempted to contact and influence prosecution witnesses through associates. The court said that Kulkarni's conduct undermined the sanctity of the trial. Kulkarni, the sitting MLA from Dharwad, is facing trial in connection with the murder of Gowda, a BJP leader and then Dharwad Zilla Panchayat member. Gowda was killed outside his gym in 2016 in what was alleged to be a politically motivated attack. A case under Sections 302 (murder), 120B (criminal conspiracy), and other provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was initially registered by the local police. In September 2019, the Karnataka government handed over the case to CBI, which re-registered the FIR and filed three supplementary chargesheets naming 15 accused, including Kulkarni. He was arrested by the CBI on November 5, 2020, and later granted bail by the Supreme Court in August 2021 under strict conditions. Kulkarni was barred from entering Dharwad district and was specifically instructed not to directly or indirectly contact or influence any witnesses. CBI moved for cancellation of his bail in December 2024, citing repeated violations of these conditions. On June 6, a separate bench of justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma cancelled the bail granted to Kulkarni in August 2021, finding sufficient material to conclude that he had attempted to interfere with witnesses. 'It would suffice to state that there is sufficient material on record to suggest that attempts have been made by the respondent (Kulkarni) to either contact witnesses or alternatively, influence such witnesses,' the bench had then noted. The court's decision came on a petition filed by CBI, which submitted call records, CCTV footage and photographs to support its claim that Kulkarni had tampered with key witnesses, including a former accused-turned-approver. The agency specifically alleged that Kulkarni tried to reach out to prosecution witnesses Nagappa Bairagonde and Suresh Jagdev Hulle through intermediaries. More notably, the CBI claimed that he approached Shivanand Shreshail Biradar -- an accused who later turned approver to support the prosecution's case, to influence his deposition. The agency said Biradar retracted his earlier statement after being pressured in November 2024. The bench found the evidence credible and said that continuing Kulkarni's bail would defeat the ends of justice. 'Keeping in mind the totality of circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the bail granted to the respondent ought to be cancelled,' stated the June 6 order, directing Kulkarni to surrender before the trial court or jail authorities within a week. In that order, the Supreme Court also took exception to a trial court's April 25 decision refusing to cancel Kulkarni's bail on the grounds that it was granted by the apex court. The top court clarified that the sessions court was competent to entertain a plea under Section 439(2) of the CrPC to cancel bail on grounds of violation of conditions, even if the bail was originally granted by a constitutional court. It added that the August 2021 bail order had left it to the trial court to set appropriate conditions for Kulkarni's release, thus implicitly giving it the authority to oversee compliance.