Read Time: 07 minutes

Justice Nagaprasanna of Karnataka High Court has held that a power of attorney holder cannot maintain a petition, be it under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India or a Criminal Petition, for quashing of an FIR.

The above was held in a case where a wife filed a plea for quashing of criminal proceedings initiated by her husband and his mother. According to the order, the couple met through a website named Elite Matrimony and got married in June, 2021. It is alleged by the wife that she was tortured by the husband barely five days after the marriage.

According to the order, the wife left her matrimonial home in July 2021for her ancestral house at Kolkata. The husband and his parents traveled to Kolkata to persuade the wife to come back to Bangalore. Not acceding to the request, the wife flew to London, United Kingdom.

In November 2021, the wife and her parents returned to Kolkata for seeking annulment of marriage. By then, the husband had registered the complaint before the Police in Bangalore. It is the allegation of the husband that the wife, after marriage, had taken all the jewelry of his mother stating that she requires them for a photo shoot as she liked ethnic Indian jewels and had not returned them.

The husband also alleged that an amount of Rs.7.5 crores was transferred to the account of the wife as she has induced him to shell out the money on the ground that a property is being purchased in their joint names. The husband alleged that the wife was not even Muslim and posed herself as one in order to get married. The wife and her parents moved the court for quashing this complaint.

Court immediately took note of the fact that the wife and her parents are living in the United Kingdom and have initiated the proceedings through a power of attorney holder. The fact that the power of attorney appended to the petition is executed in Bangalore, but signed by the executants before the Notary in London was also considered by the court.

Court considered that there is no averment in the entire petition that the said power of attorney holder is aware of the facts of the case. Therefore, Court held that when there is no averment to the effect that the power of attorney holder has full knowledge of what is being filed, the writ petition would not be maintainable.

It was further pointed out by the court that the Constitutional Courts have consistently taken a view that the petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by a power of attorney holder is not maintainable.

Therefore, Court held that the present petition filed by a power of attorney holder of the accused, without seeking any permission of the Court and without even narrating in the petition that he is personally aware of the facts of the case, is not maintainable.

The court, accordingly, dismissed the petition by imposing a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioners for approaching it with unclean hands.

Case title: Samatha Christina Delfina Wills and others Vs State of Karnataka