SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.
Lovely Salhotra And Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State NCT of Delhi And Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 670 of 2017 (@ Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1666 of 2017)
Decided On : 10-04-2017
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - The appellants filed a Criminal Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The FIR filed against them was found to be an afterthought to pressurize the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the FIR registered against them under Sections 420/494/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court rejected the application, but the Supreme Court found that no cognizable offense was made out against the appellants. The Supreme Court held that the FIR was filed as an afterthought to pressurize the appellants not to prosecute their Criminal Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court was wrong in holding that the FIR cannot be quashed in part. The learned Magistrate has already opined that no offense is made out against certain co-accused. The Supreme Court found that the FIR was filed with the sole intention to pressurize the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court held that the order of the High Court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and quashed the FIR against the appellants.
Result: The appeal is allowed and the FIR against the appellants is quashed.
ORDER :
Leave granted.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 at length today.
2. We have seen the order so passed by the High Court of Delhi on 19th December, 2016 whereby it has rejected the application of the appellants - herein filed by them under Criminal Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the First Information Report No.520/2015, Police Station Mianwali Nagar, West Delhi registered under Sections 420/494/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further proceedings emanating therefrom.
3. We have taken into account the facts of the matter in question as it appears to us that no cognisable offence is made out against the appellants - herein. The High Court was wrong in holding that the F.I.R. cannot be quashed in part and it ought to have appreciated the fact that the appellants - herein cannot be allowed to suffer on the basis of the complaint filed by Respondent No.2 - herein only on the ground that the investigation against co-accused is still pending. It is pertinent to note that the learned Magistrate has opined that no offence is made out against co-accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 6 prima facie.
4. According to us, the F.I.R. in question filed against the appellants - herein by Respondent No.2 is only an after-thought with the sole intention to pressurize the appellants not to prosecute their Criminal Complaint filed by them under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
5. Accordingly, we find that the order so passed by the High Court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, we set aside the said order of the High Court and quash the F.I.R. qua the appellants - herein.
The appeal is allowed in the afore-stated terms.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.