Kim Wansoo Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [Criminal Appeal No.________ of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 4849 of 2020]
- ByPravleen Kaur --
- 15 Jun 2025 --
- 0 Comments
The Supreme Court of India in Kim Wansoo vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [Criminal Appeal No. _______ of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 4849 of 2020], decided on January 2, 2025, quashed the FIR and all criminal proceedings against the appellant, a foreign national and Project Manager involved in a large construction project.
Facts and Background
Kim Wansoo was the Project Manager for Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP (HEC India LLP), which was contracted by Hyundai Motor India Limited for the Gurgaon HMI Project. The work was subcontracted through several layers, ultimately involving M/s R.T. Construction, owned by the complainant. The complainant alleged that YSSS India Construction, in collusion with others, defaulted on payments amounting to about ₹9 crores. An FIR was registered against multiple accused, including Kim Wansoo, under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.
Kim Wansoo challenged the FIR, seeking its quashing on the ground that the allegations against him were vague and did not disclose any offense. The Allahabad High Court refused to quash the FIR but restrained arrest of the appellant unless credible evidence emerged during investigation.
Legal Issues
Whether the FIR disclosed a prima facie case against Kim Wansoo.
The scope of High Courts’ power under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash FIRs and criminal proceedings.
Whether the continuation of proceedings against the appellant would amount to abuse of process.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Court, comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, observed that the FIR did not contain specific allegations implicating Kim Wansoo or HEC India LLP. The complainant’s grievance was primarily against other entities involved in the payment default.
The Court reaffirmed that while the inherent power of High Courts under Section 482 CrPC is commonly used to quash criminal proceedings, the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 can also be invoked to prevent abuse of the legal process or to secure ends of justice.
Perusal of the FIR revealed that even if the allegations were accepted as true, they did not constitute any offense against the appellant. Forcing him to stand trial would be an abuse of process and result in miscarriage of justice.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Allahabad High Court’s order, and quashed FIR No. 64/2020 registered at Police Station Sadar Bazar, Meerut, along with all further proceedings against Kim Wansoo.
This judgment underscores the judiciary’s role in preventing frivolous or vague criminal prosecutions and affirms the High Courts’ power under Article 226 to quash criminal proceedings where no prima facie case is made out, thereby protecting individuals from harassment and misuse of the criminal justice system.
RELATED Blog
0 comments