Case Against Chargesheeted Accused Cannot Be Quashed Merely Because Other Suspects Not Chargesheeted: SC
The principle: “Case Against Chargesheeted Accused Cannot Be Quashed Merely Because Other Suspects Are Not Chargesheeted” as clarified by the Supreme Court of India,
1. Legal Principle
The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that:
A criminal case cannot be quashed simply because some other alleged suspects have not been chargesheeted.
The decision to file or not file a chargesheet against certain individuals lies with the investigating agency and is based on evidence.
If a specific accused is chargesheeted, their trial must proceed independently of the status of other alleged culprits.
Quashing under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to circumvent the judicial process when there is prima facie evidence against a chargesheeted accused.
2. Relevant Legal Provisions
Section 482 CrPC – Inherent powers of High Court:
Allows the court to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice.
However, this power cannot be exercised merely because other suspects were not chargesheeted.
Section 173 CrPC – Report of police officer on completion of investigation:
The decision to include or exclude suspects in a chargesheet is guided by investigation and evidence. Courts generally do not interfere with police discretion unless malafide or arbitrary action is proven.
3. Leading Supreme Court Cases
a) State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604)
Facts: The accused sought quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings.
Judgment: SC laid down broad guidelines for quashing, emphasizing that it should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances.
Principle: Quashing cannot be done merely because investigation did not involve some other individuals; there must be absence of prima facie evidence or abuse of process.
b) Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014)
Observation: Although primarily about arrest procedure, the SC clarified that the presence or absence of other suspects does not automatically nullify the case against the accused properly chargesheeted.
c) State of MP vs. Rameshwar Singh (2004)
Facts: The accused sought quashing of the proceedings arguing that some co-accused were not chargesheeted.
Judgment:
The SC held that the case against a chargesheeted accused cannot be quashed simply because others were not chargesheeted.
Reasoning: Each accused’s case must be considered on its own merits.
4. Key Takeaways
Individual Liability: Chargesheeted accused are liable irrespective of non-chargesheeted suspects.
Independent Trial: The trial for each accused proceeds based on evidence against them, not on the inclusion or exclusion of others.
Quashing Limitations: High Courts’ powers under Section 482 CrPC are exceptional and discretionary; absence of other suspects is not sufficient ground for quashing.
Investigation Autonomy: Decisions of police regarding who to chargesheet are primarily investigative functions, subject to judicial review only in cases of malafide or abuse.
5. Practical Implications
If an accused is chargesheeted, they must face trial unless there is clear evidence of mala fide investigation.
Legal strategy cannot rely on quashing solely due to non-chargesheeting of co-suspects.
Courts must focus on the evidence available against the chargesheeted accused, ensuring fairness while upholding the integrity of investigation.
Summary:
The Supreme Court has made it clear that non-chargesheeting of other alleged suspects cannot form a ground for quashing proceedings against a chargesheeted accused. Each accused must be evaluated independently on prima facie evidence, and quashing is reserved only for exceptional circumstances like abuse of process or lack of evidence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments