Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Vidhu Gupta - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3907 of 2024 (@ S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 10178 of 2024)
Decided On : 20-09-2024
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Appellant filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the First Information Report. By the impugned order, the High Court held that that petition had become infructuous due to the fact that the appellant was arrested. The High Court has adopted a strange approach, to say the least. The prayer was for quashing of First Information Report. Even if the appellant was arrested, it was the duty of the High Court to decide the writ petition on merits.
4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant states that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 9th August, 2024, now the appellant has been released.
5. As the High Court had not dealt with the writ petition on merits, we set aside the impugned order dated 7th May, 2024 and restore Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 6603 of 2024 to the file of High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
6. We direct the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad to list the restored petition on 14th October, 2024 in the morning.
7. Parties who are represented today shall be under an obligation to appear before the High Court on that day and no fresh notices be issued by the High Court. Till the disposal of the restored writ petition, interim relief granted on 9th August, 2024 shall continue to operate.
8. We clarify that the interim order will operate only for the benefit of the appellant.
9. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
10. All contentions on the merits of restored petition are kept open. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.
The High Court must address the merits of a writ petition rather than dismissing it based on procedural developments such as arrest.
The Supreme Court emphasized that a High Court must consider the merits of a petition when quashing an FIR, rather than dismiss it without analysis.
It surprises us in the extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it could quash a first information report. ....
A petition for quashing criminal proceedings cannot be dismissed as infructuous solely due to the filing of a charge-sheet, as it allows for broader challenges than an application for discharge.
The court granted the relief of interim bail based on the completion of custodial interrogation and the peculiar facts of the case, including the appellant being a lady.
The legal principle established is that the High Courts' power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not extend to granting no arrest orders when refusing to quash criminal proceedings.
The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly, and the judiciary should not interfere with police investigations unless there is no cognizable offence disclosed in the FIR.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
