Failure To Issue Notice Or Record Reasons Violates 'Natural Justice': Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has recently set aside an order passed by the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) that had dismissed a criminal application seeking quashing of an FIR without even issuing notice to the respondents.
The Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma observed that the High Court’s approach violated the principles of natural justice and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration.
"If the Division Bench of the High Court was not inclined to even issue notice to the respondent(s), then reasons ought to have been assigned for that purpose, or in the alternative, notice should have been issued to the respondent(s) and after giving a fair opportunity to both sides, dismissed the complaint on merits. In the absence of any of the aforesaid options being exercised by the Division Bench of the High Court, we find that the impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as we are not able to gather any reason as to why the High Court was not inclined to even issue notice to respondent(s) in the application filed by the appellant(s) herein seeking quashing of the FIR registered against the appellant(s)," the Court said.
The Court passed the judgment in an Appeal challenging the High Court’s order dated October 30, 2023, passed in Criminal Application No. 2439/2023.
The High Court had summarily dismissed the plea filed by the appellants with a brief order stating, “After hearing the learned advocate for the applicants for sometime, we are not inclined even to issue notice in this matter. Writ petition stands dismissed.”
The Supreme Court noted that although Respondent No. 2 had been served, there was no representation on their behalf before the Court. Nonetheless, the Apex Court proceeded to hear arguments from the counsel for the appellants and the State.
Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the dispute between the parties was purely civil in nature but had been given a criminal colour through the lodging of an FIR. The Counsel contended that the High Court did not assign any reasons for its refusal to even issue notice and summarily dismissed the plea, depriving the appellants of a fair hearing.
The Court found merit in this submission, holding that the High Court’s failure to either provide reasons for dismissing the plea at the threshold or to issue notice and hear both sides amounted to a denial of natural justice.
“We are not able to gather any reason as to why the High Court was not inclined to even issue notice to respondent(s) in the application filed by the appellant(s) herein seeking quashing of the FIR registered against the appellant(s),” the Court observed.
The Court further stated that if the High Court had declined to issue notice, it was obligated to record reasons for doing so. Alternatively, it could have issued notice and adjudicated the matter on merits. The absence of both these steps rendered the impugned order legally unsustainable.
Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s order, and restored Criminal Application No. 2439/2023 to the file of the High Court. The matter has been remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. "In the circumstances, we have no option but to set aside the impugned order and restore Criminal Application No. 2439/2023 on the file of the High Court, by remanding the matter to the High Court with a request to dispose the same on its own merits and in accordance with law," it said.
“This appeal is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms,” the Court concluded.
Case Title: Gopal Govind Lakade & Anr v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.