SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Abhay S.Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
Kulandaisamy And Another – Appellant
Versus
State Represented By Its Inspector Of Police And Another – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1224 of 2025 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Criminal) No.14318 of 2024)
Decided on : 07-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. investigation at preliminary stage. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. high court's approach on fir quashing. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. restoration of petition with open questions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The counter affidavit filed by the respondent-State shows that the investigation is still at the preliminary stage.
4. The appellants filed a petition for quashing First Information Report. In paragraph 6 of the impugned judgment, the High Court observed that there appears to be some material for the investigation to proceed, but at the same time, it was observed that the issue involved in the present case was of a civil nature. Perhaps, the High Court was of the view that the investigation cannot be interfered with at "an infancy stage". There is no absolute rule that even if the investigation is at a preliminary stage, the Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the CRPC") cannot interfere.
Paragraph 7 of the impugned order reads thus:
5. While dealing with a petition under Section 482 of the CRPC, such approach, as can be seen in paragraph 7 above, on the part of the High Court is unheard of. All that we can see from the impugned judgment is that the High Court has not considered the plea of the appellants for quashing the First Information Report on merits.
6. Therefore, we quash and set aside the impugned order dated 1st April, 2024 and restore Criminal O.P.No.7963 of 2024 to the file of the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The restored petition shall be listed on 24th March, 2025 in the morning before the roster Bench. The parties represented today shall be under an obligation to appear before the High Court on that day and no further notice shall be served.
7. A copy of this order shall be forwarded by the Registry of this Court to the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court of Judicature at Madras who shall ensure that the restored petition is listed before the High Court.
8. All questions are left open to be decided by the High Court.
The appeal is partly allowed on the above terms.
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. ....
The power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and with caution, especially in cases where investigation is pending, and does not permit the court to go into disputed questions ....
(1) Power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection. While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to reliability or genuin....
FIR quashing petition becomes infructuous once final report is filed. Petitioner may challenge the final report instead.
High Court is not required to go into merits of allegations and/or enter into merits of case as if High Court is exercising appellate jurisdiction and/or conducting trial.
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.