Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Against Archbishop George Alenchery Over Sale Of Diocese Properties: Kerala HC

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

• The Syro Malabar Church owned the disputed property pertaining to various sale deeds. This religious congregation allegedly had not complied with the requirements as per the byelaws laid down by the Church, which caused heavy financial loss to the Church and its parishioners.
• It was alleged that the various sale deeds were the result of a criminal conspiracy devised between the petitioner in collusion along with his henchmen and with the people who had purchased the properties.
• Further, he was accused of availing a Rs 58. 2 crores loan from the South Indian Bank without the initiation of any discussion of the Canon law provisions and the law in force.
• A complaint against the petitioner and another was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class.
• The Magistrate passed an order taking cognizance of the offence.
• The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Sessions Court against this order, but it was dismissed as well.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

The petitioner was charged with the following sections.

• Section 120B of IPC: It lays down the punishment of criminal conspiracy. It states that whoever takes part in a criminal conspiracy and commits any crime under it, is liable to get six months of imprisonment or fine or both.
• Section 406 of IPC: This Section lays down the punishment for criminal breach of trust. It states that any person committing criminal breach of trust must be punished with three years of imprisonment or fine or both.
• Section 409 of IPC: This Section talks about the criminal breach of trust done by any public servant, banker, agent, merchant. It states that anyone, who is in the capacity of a public servant, commits any breach of trust can be punished with life imprisonment, fine or both.
• Section 418 of IPC: It lays down the punishment for cheating while having the complete knowledge that the wrongful loss may ensue to the person whose interest the offender is bound to protect.
• Section 420 of IPC: It states that anyone who cheats and dishonestly induces anyone for delivering of property shall be punished with imprisonment of ten years, fine or both.
• Section 423 of IPC: It talks about the false statement of consideration carried out under the dishonest or fraudulent execution of the deed.
• Section 465,467 and 468 of IPC: This Section gives punishment for forgery, forgery of valuable items and forgery done with the intention of cheating respectively.

CONTENTIONS RAISED

• Senior Counsel George Poonthottam, representing the petitioner, argued that the Syro Malabar Church is an episcopal institution and not a congregational institution and as per their bylaws, the Bishop of Archdiocese has the right to alienate and dispose its properties.
• Relying upon the decisions in Muthusamier and Ors v. Sree Sree Methanithi Swamiyar Avergal and Ors., the counsel contented that the archbishop should be considered as the "corporation sole" and the real owner and not a mere trustee relating to the property of the diocese.
• He further submitted that if it is the government land, it comes under the purview of Article 226 of the Constitution and not under Section 482 of CrPC.

OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE COURT

• The Court held that it cannot close its eyes considering the above-mentioned facts and a proper and detailed enquiry must be conducted by the State Government and the investigating agencies.
• Regarding the criminal conspiracy, the Court took into notice the prevailing land value and market value of the prime lands and asserted that discrepancies clearly depict the extent of a criminal conspiracy hatched with the purchasers of the property.
• Further, the Court observed that the provisions under 482 of the CrPC are an independent provision which deals with the inherent power of the Court. Finally it established that, the Court can exercise its power even suo moto, keeping in view the best interests of justice and required no formal application.
• It issued certain directions to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter of settlement of the deed.

WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ABOUT IT?