Recently, in the matter of Abhijit Saha v. State & Anr. , the Calcutta High Court quashed Criminal Proceedings against a person booked under Section 406 (Punishment for criminal breach of trust) and section 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of IPC. The bench of Justice Rai Chattopadhyay held that allegations made against the petitioner did not depict any cognizable offence under the said provisions.

“Peculiarly enough in this case the complaint discloses alleged acts of biases, not affording an opportunity of hearing to the complainant by the present petitioner and at the worst, of assault and intimidating him and subjecting him to wrongful confinement…None of these acts would ever fall within the purview of the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused person/ petitioner. There are no allegations of inducement or inducement for the purpose of deception of the complainant, or any culpability of the intention of the present petitioner to fraudulently misappropriate any of the entrusted properties of the complainant.” said Court. 

In the said matter, the complaint was lodged against three persons including the petitioner alleging that a departmental enquiry has been conducted against him on vexatious allegations. The Complainant further alleged that -

The petitioner being the enquiry officer in the said departmental proceedings, repeatedly humiliated him by being aided by the other accused person and persuaded the other accused person to lie in the enquiry against him. 

Allegations were also made in the complaint that the complainant was wrongfully restrained and subjected to assault by all the accused persons. 

The bench of the trial Court examined the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and issued summons vide order dated May 30, 2022, against the accused persons under sections 406 and 420 IPC after taking cognizance of the offence and finding that a prima facie case has been made out against the accused persons including the present petitioner. 

When the Orders of the Trial Court approached the High Court, the Bench of the Calcutta High Court held that -“The complainant may even be aggrieved, though has not been able to lay the foundation of any offence or culpability of the present petitioner in this case. A person may be aggrieved at his emotional level by the behaviour or conduct of any other person, but not every such action would amount to be culpable or criminal unless satisfied to be so, on the anvil of the settled provisions of law justifying necessary ingredients of the offence alleged against that person.”

The court quashed and set aside the complaint and subsequent proceedings against the petitioner on the ground that continuance of the same would only amount to gross abuse of the process of law and the court as well.