Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ARUN KUMAR JHA, J.
Chandan Kumar Prasar S/o Ramdayal Singh – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 75148, 77262 of 2019
Decided On : 14-07-2022
FIR Quashing - Criminal Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code Sections 341, 323, 379, 406, 420 - The court quashed the FIR registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code as it was found to be an abuse of process of law and in contravention of the specific guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava (supra).
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition to quash the FIR registered against him and others for offenses under the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner argued that the FIR was registered in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and that the allegations did not constitute an offense under the mentioned sections.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the FIR was registered in contravention of the specific guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and was an abuse of process of law. The court did not delve into the merits of the case but quashed the FIR based on the legal bar engrafted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava (supra).
Issues: Violation of guidelines for FIR registration, abuse of process of law, contravention of specific guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the violation of specific guidelines for FIR registration as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the abuse of process of law. The court emphasized the need for compliance with the guidelines and the legal bar engrafted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in similar cases.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR, bearing Motihari Town Case No. 488 of 2019, registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, as it was found to be an abuse of process of law and against the provisions of law.
JUDGMENT :
ARUN KUMAR JHA, J.
In Cr. Misc. No. 77262 of 2019
1. Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, for the opposite party no. 2 as well learned APP for the State.
2. The instant petition has been filed for quashing of the First Information Report bearing Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 488/2019 dated 18.07.2019, which has been registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and 3-4 other unknown persons stated to be the employees of the company of the petitioner, namely Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. by opposite party No. 2.
3. It appears from the record that a complaint petition bearing Complaint Case No. 552 of 2019 was filed before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran, by the complainant, who is opposite party no. 2 herein, for a direction under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for registration of the FIR on the basis of his complaint.
4. The contents of the complaint in brief are as follows:
5. Subsequently, vide order dated 04.04.2019, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate sent the complaint for registration of FIR and thereafter, the FIR bearing Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 488 of 2019 has been registered on 18.07.2019.
6. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the FIR, which has been registered as per the directions issued under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, deserves to be quashed as it has been registered by ignoring the provisions of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2015) 6 SCC 287, wherein a number of guidelines were issued for the Judicial Magistrates for ensuring that frivolous cases which are filed to settle personal score and to settle commercial disputes are not entertained and are rejected at the outset. In the instant case, there is violation of such guidelines as one of the guidelines was that the complaint must be supported by an affidavit and supporting documents to show the compliance of Section 154 (1) and 154 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned counsel further submits that no such affidavit has been filed. Furthermore, it
Compliance with specific guidelines for FIR registration as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is essential, and the court may quash an FIR if it is found to be an abuse of process of law and in ....
The main legal point established is the mandatory registration of FIR if the information discloses a cognizable offence and the need for a preliminary inquiry in certain cases. The court emphasized t....
The court emphasized that successive FIRs regarding the same incident are impermissible and quashed the FIR based on concealment of previous complaints and forum shopping, affirming the requirement o....
The court ruled that failure to file a supporting affidavit under Section 156(3) does not necessarily invalidate proceedings if substantial evidence of wrongdoing exists against the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for judicious exercise of powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the duty of the police to register an FIR only if a cognizable o....
The police station is bound to register an FIR when a cognizable offence is made out, and the Magistrate has wide powers under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to ensure proper investigation.
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
