Harish v. State of U.P., (SC)
: Law Finder Doc Id # 810469
2016 All SCR (Crl.) 1752
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Before:- Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C. Pant, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No(S). 931 of 2016 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 10161 of 2013). D/d.
Harish - Appellant
State of U.P & Ors. - Respondents
For the Appellant :- Mr. Aditya Singh, Mr. Aakash Sirohi, Mr. Tushar Rudra, and M. P. Shorawala, Advocates.
For the Respondents :- Mr. T.N. Singh and Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Advocates.
Constitution of India, 1950 Article 134 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482 Refusal to quash proceeding - Appeal - Appellant sought quashing of proceeding - On same facts prosecution launched against appellant under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act - Proceeding ended on finding of acquittal - Proceeding under Indian Penal Code bound to be sham - High Court ought to have quashed proceeding - Order of High court refusing quashing set aside.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material.
3. The challenge in this appeal is against the order of the High Court dated 07.08.2013 by which the proceedings under Section 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant has been refused to be quashed by the High Court.
4. It appears that on the same facts a prosecution under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (as it then existed) was launched against the appellant. The said proceedings have ended in acquittal on the finding that the food item was not kept for sale. The said finding in the parallel proceeding has attained finality in law. In view of the aforesaid finding recorded in the proceeding under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, the instant prosecution is bound to be a lame/sham prosecution. Having considered the matter in the aforesaid light, we are of the view that the High Court ought to have quashed the proceedings in exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The High Court having failed to do so, we quash the proceedings in question and allow this appeal. The order of the High Court is accordingly set aside.
Previous Hitlist Next