The Supreme Court of India in its recent decision in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another has acknowledged that calling a person to appear in a criminal court as an accused is a matter affecting one’s dignity, self-respect and image in society and should not be used as a weapon of harassment. Summoning an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. A magistrate is not required to act on a complaint simply because such complaint is filed before him. Before summons are issued to any accused, a magistrate is required to scrutinize carefully the evidence placed by the complainant, and if required question the complainant and the witness(es) to find out the truthfulness of the allegations and examine if any offence is prima facie committed.
The judgment in Delhi Race Club also covers the following key issues of law: (a) difference between ‘breach of trust’ and ‘criminal breach of trust’, (b) difference between ‘cheating’ and ‘criminal breach of trust’, (c) vicarious liability of office bearers of a company in criminal matters; and (d) maintainability of a petition for quashing of summons.
In this note, we analyze the aforesaid Supreme Court’s judgment in Delhi Race Club.
