Bhubaneswar: Pulling up a litigant for abusing the criminal justice system, Orissa high court has quashed a criminal complaint against Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) and its chairman Mukesh Ambani over a faulty mobile handset, imposed a fine of Rs 1,000 on the complainant and criticised a lower court for issuing summons without adequate judicial scrutiny.Justice S K Panigrahi also noted the incongruity in the lower court’s move seeking to summon the RIL chairman as an accused over a defective mobile handset worth Rs 501, sold by a dealer in Rourkela more than two decades back. The HC observed that accepting such an approach would mean “a passenger could summon the railway minister for a delayed train”.While acknowledging that the complainant may have had a genuine grievance over the handset and telecom services received in 2003, Justice Panigrahi observed that “a sense of grievance, however deep, does not entitle a person to weaponise the criminal law against those who have already been found to bear no criminal liability.” The order, passed on March 31, was made available online on Wednesday.RIL and Ambani had approached the HC seeking quashing of the case pending before the SDJM, Panposh and a summons issued on Jan 27 following a complaint by Prafulla Kumar Mishra, a Rourkela resident.The HC noted that the present complaint was the fourth round of criminal proceedings initiated by the same complainant on the same set of facts, arising out of a telecom subscription transaction dating back to 2003.As per the case details, in 2003, Mishra had subscribed to a telecom scheme introduced by Reliance Infocomm by paying Rs 501 and agreeing to make monthly payments thereafter. A mobile handset was supplied by a local dealer. Mishra alleged that the handset was defective and the promised telecom services were never properly provided. He then filed a criminal complaint against Ambani, who was then the chairman of Reliance Infocomm.The HC pointed out that the first two complaints, filed in 2003 and 2004, were quashed by the high court in 2004 and 2005, respectively, while the Supreme Court dismissed the related special leave petitions in 2007.The HC observed that the dispute, spanning nearly 23 years, involved a trivial transaction value of Rs 501, but had resulted in “sustained and almost unrelenting pursuit” of criminal proceedings. At every stage, courts found no merit in the prosecution, yet proceedings continued in one form or another, the HC noted.“To put the matter in perspective, what the opposite party has effectively done is to summon the chairman of one of the largest corporate conglomerates in the country as an accused in a complaint about a defective mobile handset worth Rs 501, sold by a local dealer in Rourkela more than two decades ago,” the court stated.It added that if such an approach was accepted, “there would be nothing to prevent a passenger from summoning the railway minister for a delayed train, or a postal customer from arraigning the postmaster general for a lost letter, or a consumer from prosecuting the Union minister for food for a defective item supplied through a ration outlet.”The court imposed a cost of Rs 1,000 on the complainant, directing that the amount be deposited with the Juvenile Justice Fund of the Odisha State Legal Services Authority within four weeks.The HC also expressed concern over the manner in which the SDJM, Panposh dealt with the complaint, observing that the circumstances alone ought to have triggered closer judicial scrutiny.“Summons were issued to an unrelated individual and to a company having no apparent connection with the transaction, on the basis of a complaint reiterating allegations already examined and rejected by this court and by the Supreme Court. A magistrate is required to apply his mind before setting the criminal law in motion, particularly where the complaint itself bears indications of being part of a series of proceedings. That level of scrutiny is not evident in the present case,” Justice Panigrahi observed.
