Criminality Absent, Civil Suit Pending -Breach of Contract is Not Cheating – SC Sets Aside FIR Where Specific Performance Suit is Pending – FIR in Land Agreement Quashed as Abuse of Process of Court; SC Quashes Criminal Case in Bhoopasandra Land Dispute, Says Issue is Civil & Criminality Missing.
In S. N. Vijayalakshmi & Ors. Vs State of Karnataka & Anr. (Criminal Appeal from SLP (Crl.) No.8626 of 2024, decided on 31.07.2025), the Supreme Court set aside FIR No.260/2023 & the charge-sheet filed against the appellants relating to an Agreement to Sell dated 30.11.2015. The complainant alleged cheating after cancellation of GPA & execution of release & gift deeds, while also filing a civil suit for specific performance.
The Bench held that once a civil suit on the same transaction is pending, continuation of criminal proceedings is impermissible when the ingredients of cheating or criminal breach of trust are not made out. The Court noted that the appellants were themselves owners of the property, there was no entrustment, no dishonest inducement, & at best the matter was contractual in nature. Stressing that the criminal case was only a civil dispute dressed as crime, the Court quashed the FIR, charge-sheet & cognizance order.
The Court dwelt upon the question of whether civil and criminal proceedings both can be maintained on the very same set of allegations qua the same person(s), the answer stricto sensu, is that there is no bar to simultaneous civil and criminal proceedings. If the element of criminality is there, a civil case can co-exist with a criminal case on the same facts. The fact that a civil remedy has already been availed of by a complainant, ipso facto, is not sufficient ground to quash an FIR . The obvious caveat being that the allegations, even if having a civil flavour to them, must prima facie disclose an overwhelming element of criminality. In the absence of the element of criminality, if both civil and criminal cases are allowed to continue, it will definitely amount to abuse of the process of the Court, which the Courts have always tried to prevent by putting a stop to any such criminal proceeding, where civil proceedings have already been instituted with regard to the same issue, and the element of criminality is absent. If such element is absent, the prosecution in question would have to be quashed.
While extending the benefit to all accused, the Court also expressed serious concern over the conduct of BDA in withdrawing appeals against land acquisition, terming it collusive & detrimental to citizens. It restrained creation of third-party rights till disposal of BDA’s pending SLPs, while allowing the civil suit to proceed.
Author Bio
