‘Courts cannot work like a recovery agent for recovery of money’, Supreme Court said
The Supreme Court has said that the courts cannot function as recovery agent and condemned the tendency to convert civil disputes into criminal cases in any dispute. Justice Suryakant and Justice N. The bench of Kotishwar Singh said that the threat of arrest cannot be used to recover the outstanding amount. It has become a recent trend that the parties file criminal cases for recovery of money, while it is completely crazy dispute.
The Supreme Court made these comments on Monday (September 22, 2025) in a criminal case related to Uttar Pradesh, where a person was accused of kidnapping in a dispute over recovery of money. Additional Solicitor General K.K. M. Natraj said that such complaints have increased. He argued that in such cases the police get stuck in the middle because if he does not register an FIR despite a cognizable offense case, the court reprimands him, and if he files it, he is accused of bias and it is said that the police did not follow the legal process.
He said that usually in these complaints, the dispute of recovery of money is given as a criminal case. Justice Suryakant said that the court understands the dilemma of the police and also mentioned that if an FIR is not registered in cases of cognizable offense, the police are reprimanded for not following the Supreme Court’s 2013 Lalita Kumari verdict.
The bench advised the police that before the arrest of a person, he should use his conscience to see whether the matter is crazy or criminal. The court said that the misuse of criminal law in this way is becoming a serious threat to the judicial system. Justice Suryakant commented, ‘The courts are not a recovery agent to recover the dues for the parties. This type of judicial system cannot be tolerated.
The Supreme Court suggested to Nataraja that a nodal officer can be appointed in each district, who is a retired District Judge. Police will be able to decide whether the matter is crazy or criminal and then proceeded according to the law. The bench asked Nataraja to get instructions in this regard and inform the court in two weeks.
