Back
ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN
Kulandaisamy – Appellant
Versus
State Represented By Its Inspector Of Police – Respondent
| 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:
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....
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.
The investigating agency cannot be restrained from investigating the FIR if it prima facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offence.
Courts should exercise quashing powers sparingly and allow reasonable time for investigation before considering quashing criminal proceedings.
The High Court must address the merits of a writ petition rather than dismissing it based on procedural developments such as arrest.
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
