Imran vs. State Of Uttarakhand
Facts
The applicant, an advocate, is a named accused in Criminal Case No. 2988 of 2021, "State Vs. Imran." He is facing trial for offenses under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC. The FIR alleges that he was instrumental in changing the name of a firm from "K K Kirana" to "K K Industry," thereby defrauding the respondent no. 2 of INR 39 Lakh. Additionally, the FIR refers to similar offenses involving "Deendayal & Company," where the applicant allegedly misused a GST number to wrongfully gain INR 25 Lakh. The applicant filed a C482 application before the High Court.
Held
The Court held that the C482 application is dismissed. The reasoning is based on the nature of the offenses alleged, which are described as criminal and unbecoming of an officer of the Court, casting a stigma on the legal fraternity. Specifically, the offenses under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC are not compoundable. The Court noted that the applicant, by profession an advocate, is expected to uphold ethical values, which he allegedly failed to do by engaging in fraudulent activities. Consequently, the Court referred the matter to the Bar Council for appropriate action, including disciplinary proceedings for the cancellation of the applicant's license. The operative direction is the dismissal of the C482 application and the referral to the Bar Council.
Key Issues
1. Whether the C482 application, seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offenses, should be allowed, considering the applicant's alleged fraudulent activities. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in cases involving serious criminal offenses. The applicant, an advocate, argued for the quashing of proceedings. The State argued that the offenses alleged are serious and non-compoundable, warranting continuation of the criminal trial. The judgment does not explicitly detail arguments from the respondent no. 2, other than their role as the defrauded party.
Sections Cited
Section 482
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Sl. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
C482 No.1450 of 2021 Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. Basant Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate, for the applicant.
Mr. V.K. Gemini, DAG, for the State of Uttarakhand.
Mr. Jarnail Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Shailabh Pandey, Advocate, for the respondent.
The applicant, who is an Advocate by profession, has indulged himself in commission of the criminal offences, which are unbecoming for the officer of the Court, and rather it casts a stigma on the entire fraternity. He is said to be a named accused person in Criminal Case No.2988 of 2021, “State Vs. Imran”, wherein he has been summoned to be tried for the offences under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, and as complaint of in the FIR, he was a person who was instrumental in changing the name of the firm from “K K Kirana” to “K K Industry”, and thereby duping the respondent no.2, of sum of Rupees Thirty Nine Lakh, along with indulging himself in similar other offences, which has been referred to in t
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.