Calcutta High Court quashes proceedings against DSP accused of harassing colleague during departmental enquiry
Court said that every emotional behaviour or conduct would not be considered a criminal act.
A single judge bench of Justice Rai Chattopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri recently quashed criminal proceedings against a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) in Government Railway Police on the ground that the allegations made against him did not depict any cognizable offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The DSP was facing prosecution under sections 406 (Punishment for criminal breach of trust) and 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the IPC.
The complainant in the case filed a complaint against three individuals, including the petitioner, stating that a departmental investigation was initiated against him based on vexatious charges. He also claimed that the petitioner, as the enquiry officer in the departmental processes, humiliated him repeatedly while being assisted by the other accused person and persuaded the other accused person to lie in the investigation against him. It was also contended that he had been threatened with false implications.
The Trial court at Siliguri examined the complainant under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It issued summons against the petitioner by order dated 30 May 2022 under sections 420 & 406 of IPC while noting that a prima facie case had been made out against the petitioner.
The petitioner aggrieved by the findings of the trial court approached the high court under Section 482 of CrPC.
The high court said that in order for the petitioner to be guilty of an offence under Section 406 of IPC the petitioner must have had the intention to commit fraudulent misappropriation of any property entrusted to him by the complainant
The court further observed, "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".
Furthermore, the court observed that:
"The Court cannot but with frustration and hopelessness be constrained to observe that the finding of the Trial Court of a prime facie case having been made out against the present petitioner, suffers from the brazen perfunctory and negligent discourse of the power vested in the Trial Court by law.”
“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,” the court further said.
Accordingly, on the basis of the above findings, the court set aside the case and subsequent proceedings as well.
Case Title: Abhijit Saha vs. State & Anr.
Statute – Sections 406, 420 of IPC, Sections 200 & 482 of CrPC