IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Shiv Kumar Saxena & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Cr.M.C. 944 of 2023
Decided On : 10-02-2023
Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - The court dismissed the petition for quashing of FIR under Section 441/120-B/34 of IPC, stating that the allegations were not absurd or highly improbable, and the court cannot throttle the proceedings or investigation at this stage.
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed for quashing of FIR under Section 441/120-B/34 of IPC, stating that the allegations were civil in nature and the FIR was registered in a mechanical manner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations were not absurd or highly improbable, and it cannot throttle the proceedings or investigation at this stage.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR should be quashed based on the nature of the allegations and the manner in which it was registered.
Ratio Decidendi: The court cannot throttle the proceedings or investigation at an early stage, and the allegations should not be absurd or highly improbable to quash the FIR.
Final Decision: The petition for quashing of FIR was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 3620/2023 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 944/2023
3. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") has been filed by petitioners for quashing of FIR no. 738/2022, registered at Police Station Dabri, Dwarka Distt, for the offences punishable under Section 441/120-B/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC").
4. Brief facts of the present case are that the impugned FIR was registered after a complaint case bearing no. 1079/2022 was filed by the complainant, under Section 200 read with Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C before learned Metropolitan Magistrate, South West District, Delhi against petitioner no. 1 and 2. Learned Metropolitan Magistrate had allowed the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C vide order dated 03.08.2022 and had directed the SHO, P.S. Dabri to register FIR. Subsequently, the FIR was registered against the petitioners.
5. It is stated by learned for petitioners that the allegations in this case are civil in nature, therefore, the FIR be quashed. He also states that order was passed by learned Magistrate on 03.08.2022 which shows that FIR was registered in mechanical manner. He also states that civil litigation is pending between the parties and therefore since the petitioners are already in possession of the property in question, there is no question of tress passing the property.
6. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, states that petition is pre-mature and FIR cannot be quashed on the grounds raised by learned counsel for petition.
7. I have gone through the order passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Dwarka Courts, South West District, Delhi, which reads as under:
Therefore, in view of the settled law as held by the Hon1ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. & Others, 2014 (2) SCC 1, S.H.O concern is duty bound to register the PIR on disclosure of cognizable offence.
In view of submissions of EO and above discussion, application is allowed. SHO, PS Dabri is directed to register FIR and file the compliance report on the next date of hearing.
It is needless to mention that investigating agency shall be at liberty to investigate the matter impartially and in accordance with law. The police shall not be bound or be influenced by any observation on merits made herein above and may draw its own conclusions based on its investigation. This order shall not be construed as a direction to carry out arrest of any person. The order shall also not be construed as a finding of involvement or guilt of any person in the commission of any offence. This order shall not be treated as a direction to file a charge sheet against the accused persons. The police shall be at liberty to file a cancellation report in case it finds that no offence has been committed by the accused persons.
Put up for report of compliance on 04.08.2022."
8. I have also given my consideration to the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
9. The FIR in this case was registered on 04.08.2022 and the investigation is under way. It is not yet known as to whether the investigating agency will file charge-sheet or a closure report in this case. In case the allegations are found to be totally civil in nature, it is for the investigating agency to file a closure report and in case the petitioner will be aggrieved thereafter, he may approach the appropriate Court.
10. From bare perusal of the complaint, this Court is not persuaded to reach a conclusion that the allegation levelled against the petitioners are absurd, highly improbable or that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding further in the case.
11. At this stage, as per law, this Court cannot throttle the proceedings or investigation, when the investigation has not yet been carried out completely.
12. Fin
AI
The court cannot throttle the proceedings or investigation at an early stage, and the allegations should not be absurd or highly improbable to quash the FIR.
Allegations requiring investigation cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at an early stage.
The court emphasized that the power to quash an FIR should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and that criminal proceedings should not be scuttled at the initial stage unless there is a ....
The court emphasized that discrepancies in the complainant's case and the defense raised by the accused could be appreciated at the stage of trial, and the existence of other disputes between the par....
A Magistrate cannot revert to the pre-cognizance stage after taking cognizance of a complaint, making the order to register an FIR legally untenable.
Registration of FIR under section 497 IPC, found unconstitutional, deemed illegal; permission for investigating section 506 IPC required, thus highlighting the need for judicial discretion in FIR reg....
Quashing of FIR should be sparingly exercised, especially in cases of serious offences, and the Court should not interfere with the investigation at the initial stage.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash an FIR should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases, as per the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
Pending Cr.P.C Section 156(3) application cannot be quashed without magistrate's order; direct expeditious disposal.
The power to quash an FIR should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, especially when the investigation is pending and charge-sheet is yet to be filed. It should be done only in the rarest....
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.