In a significant decision delivered on January 2, 2025, by a bench comprising Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar, the Supreme Court reiterated that High Courts possess the authority to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution alongside Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to quash criminal cases. The judgment came in the appeal of Kim Wansoo, a foreign national and project manager, whose petition sought relief from what was termed as “vexatious” criminal proceedings.
Case Background
The controversy began with Hyundai Motor India Limited awarding a construction project to Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP (HEC India LLP), where Kim Wansoo served as the project manager. The project was subcontracted multiple times, eventually involving M/s. RT Construction, the complainant, who alleged non-payment of dues totaling ₹9 crores.
An FIR was filed under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, accusing the appellant and others of criminal conspiracy, cheating, and breach of trust. Despite his cooperation and submission of relevant documents during the investigation, the allegations persisted. After the Allahabad High Court denied his plea to quash the FIR, Wansoo approached the Supreme Court.
Important Legal Issues
1. Scope of High Court’s Powers: Whether High Courts can exercise Article 226 of the Constitution concurrently with Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings.
2. Nature of Allegations: Whether the FIR allegations, if accepted at face value, disclosed any cognizable offence against the appellant.
3. Protection Against Abuse of Law: Safeguarding individuals from frivolous litigation and misuse of criminal processes.
Key Observations by the Court
The Supreme Court emphasized that High Courts are not restricted to using Section 482 Cr.P.C. alone to address grievances in criminal proceedings. The judgment reaffirmed that the extraordinary powers under Article 226 can also be invoked to prevent abuse of the process of law or to ensure justice.
Quoting earlier precedents, the Court stated:
“The High Court’s powers under Article 226 and Section 482 are concurrent and can be exercised to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice. Each case must be examined in its context.”
Addressing the allegations, the bench noted that:
– The FIR did not disclose a clear commission of any offence by the appellant.
– The vague and generalized accusations were insufficient to warrant a trial, highlighting that forcing the appellant to undergo legal proceedings would result in a miscarriage of justice.
The Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings against Kim Wansoo. The bench observed that the High Court erred in not exercising its discretionary power to quash the proceedings when the allegations lacked prima facie substance.
The judgment clarified that invoking both Article 226 and Section 482 is permissible and necessary in cases where criminal proceedings are manifestly unjust or maliciously instituted.
Case Details
– Case Title: Kim Wansoo v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
– Case Number: SLP (Crl.) No. 4849 of 2020
– Bench: Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
