SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surya Kant, J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.
N.V. Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Application No. 1238 of 2022 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 239 of 2022
Decided On : 19-07-2022
Article 32 - Writ Jurisdiction - Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 295A, 153A, 505(1)(B), 504, 505(2), 506, 153B, 298, 34 - The court issued notice to respondents in a writ petition seeking quashing of multiple FIRs and directed no coercive action against the petitioner pending the outcome of the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking quashing of multiple FIRs filed against her. The petitioner also filed a miscellaneous application citing threats to her life and liberty.
Finding of the Court:
The court issued notice to the respondents in the miscellaneous application and directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned FIRs or any future FIRs pertaining to a specific telecast.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's plea for protection of her life and liberty in light of subsequent events, including threats and additional FIRs.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's concern was to ensure that the petitioner is able to avail the appropriate remedy as permitted by the court's previous order, and thus issued notice to the respondents and directed no coercive action against the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court directed notice to be issued to the respondents in the miscellaneous application and directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pending the outcome of the petition.
ORDER
1. The original writ petition was filed by the petitioner invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution in which the first and foremost prayer reads as follows:
"(i) Issue an appropriate writ quashing the following Complaints/FIRs filed against the Petitioner:
a. FIR at the Pydhonie Police Station, District Thane City area in Mumbai, Maharashtra - FIR No. 683/2022, dated 28.05.2022 under Sections 295A, 153A and 505(1)(B) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC);
b. FIR at Cyber Cell Police Station Hyderabad, Telangana - FIR No. 959/2022 dated 30.05.2022 under Sections 153A, 504, 505(2) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code;
c. FIR at Mumbra Police Station, Thane City, Maharashtra - FIR No. 528/2022 dated 30.05.2022 under Sections 153A, 153B, 295A, 298 and 505 of the Indian Penal Code;
d. FIR at Bhiwandi Police Station, Thane City, Maharashtra - FIR No. 0199/2022 dated 30.05.2022 under Sections 153A, 153B, 295A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code;
e. FIR at Kondhwa Police Station, Pune City, Maharashtra under Sections 153A, 153B, 295A as FIR No. 540/2022 dated 31.05.2022.
f. FIR in West Bengal Narkeldanga PS Case No. 220 dated 13.06.2022 under Sections 153A, 295A, 298 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code;
g. FIR in New Delhi by Delhi Police(2/2) IFSO unit dated 08.06.2022 to the extent it relates to the present petitioner only;
h. FIR at PS Nanalpeth, District Parbhani, Maharashtra, FIR No. 0221/2022, dated 13.06.2022 under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code;
i. FIR at Amherst PS, Kolkata, West Bengal, PS Case No. 125 dated 07.06.2022 under Sections 153A, 295A, 298 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code; and
j . Any other FIR that may have been registered with regard to the telecast on 26.05.2022 on Times Now;
Since the above reproduced prayers for quashing of the FIRs can be effectively granted by a High Court in exercise of its powers under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court on 01.07.2022 relegated the petitioner to avail such alternative remedy.
The petitioner has now filed miscellaneous application no. 1238/2022 pointing out, inter alia, that it has become nearly impossible for her to avail the alternative remedy granted by this Court and that there is an imminent necessity for this Court to intervene and protect her life and liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
In support of her plea, the petitioner has averred in the miscellaneous application that after the order dated 01.07.2022 passed by this Court, various subsequent events have occurred, including -
(i) One Salman Chisti claiming to be a Khadim of Ajmer Dargah has circulated a video whereby in a very disturbing manner he has called upon for cutting the throat of the applicant/petitioner;
(ii) One more person, Nasir, resident of Uttar Pradesh, has made a viral video using abusive language against the petitioner and threatened to behead her;
(iii) Some more FIRs have been registered in the State of West Bengal which were earlier not in the knowledge of the petitioner; and
(iv) The Kolkata Police has issued a 'lookout circular' dated 02.07.2022 due to which she apprehends her immediate arrest and consequential denial of fair opportunity to approach different High Courts for seeking quashing of the FIRs.
During the course of hearing, Shri Maninder Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has referred to two more instances where there is a serious threat to the life of the petitioner and these instances are reported to have taken place after filing of this miscellaneous application. He seeks and is permitted to file an additional affidavit giving specific details of these instances.
In the light of these subsequent events, some of which have been noticed above, the concern of this Court is to ensure that the petitioner is able to avail the appropriate remedy as permitted by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2022.
In order to explore such modalities, let notice be issued to the respond
The court's power to issue notice and provide interim protection to the petitioner pending the outcome of the writ petition.
The court has the authority to grant liberty for urgent listing, direct the production of the petitioner before a specific court, and prohibit precipitate steps against the petitioner in connection w....
Point of Law : High Court should not foreclose itself from the exercise of powers when a citizen has been arbitrarily deprived of personal liberty in the exercise of State powers, apart from other pa....
The Supreme Court ruled that a pending FIR can be quashed even after a chargesheet is filed if cognizance of the offense has not been taken, affirming the court's continued jurisdiction under Article....
Article 32 of the Constitution of India provides the basis for seeking the quashing of the FIR in this case.
The court emphasized the specific nature of the offenses under different State enactments and recent judgments in declining to grant the relief sought by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Consti....
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.