IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Sonia Verma & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State, National Capital Territory of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 959 of 2023
Decided On : 10-02-2023
FIR Registration - Quashing of Order - The court dismissed the petition for quashing the order directing FIR registration, stating that the allegations against the petitioners require investigation and cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at this stage.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner and respondent entered into a partnership, but disputes arose leading to the respondent filing a complaint against the petitioner for cheating and criminal intimidation. The court directed the police to register an FIR based on the complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against the petitioners require investigation and cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at this stage, dismissing the petition for quashing the order directing FIR registration.
Issues: Dispute over partnership leading to criminal complaint, petition for quashing the order directing FIR registration.
Ratio Decidendi: Allegations require investigation and cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at this stage.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition for quashing the order directing FIR registration, stating that the allegations against the petitioners require investigation and cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at this stage.
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 3660/2023 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 959/2023 & CRL.M.A. 3661/2023
3. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioners for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 03.02.2023 passed by learned Special Fast Track Court South West District Dwarka Court, New Delhi in criminal revision no. 520/2022 whereby the revisional Court dismissed the revision petition and upheld the order dated 18.10.2022 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, in CT case no. 1634/2021.
4. Issue notice. Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of State.
5. Brief facts of the present case are that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 became friendly and after some time entered into a partnership business. Some money was exchanged between them as personal loan. Thereafter, the respondent no. 2 became interested to invest money in some other scheme. After some time, differences arose between the petitioner no. 1 and 2 and respondent no. 2. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 had filed a complaint against the petitioner with the police for cheating and criminal intimidation. On 18.10.2022, learned Metropolitan Magistrate directed the police to register FIR against the petitioner and submit its report to the Court. Thereafter, petitioner preferred the revision petition against the order dated 18.10.2022 passed by learned Magistrate and vide order dated 03.02.2023, the learned Special Fast Track Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioners.
6. It is stated by learned counsel for petitioners that the dispute in this case is civil in nature as well as the petitioners herein had already filed a complaint against the respondent no. 2. It is now stated that present FIR has been ordered to be registered on the complaint which was filed after the complaint filed by the present petitioners under section 200 Cr.P.C which is still pending adjudication before the concerned Trial Court. It is, therefore, stated that the impugned order be quashed.
7. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, states that investigation is required and there is no infirmity in the impugned order.
8. I have gone through the order passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate-05, South West, Dwarka Courts, South, Delhi, which reads as under:
"In view of the settled law as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. & Others, 2014 (2) SCC 1, SHO is duty bound to register the FIR on disclosure of cognizable offence. Accordingly, application is allowed. SHO, PS Vikas Puri is directed to register a FIR and file the compliance report on the next date of hearing.
Put up for report of compliance on 14.12.2022.
9. The order dated 03.02.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Fast Track Court (RC) South West District, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi is as under:
"In the peculiar facts of this case, as detailed here-in-above, this Court does not find any palpable absurdity or perversity in the impugned order of the Ld. Trial Court. No ground exists, which calls for interference in the discretion exercised by the Ld. Trial Court in allowing the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and issuing directions for registration of FIR.
For the foregoing reasons, present revision petition, filed by the revisionist/complainant is hereby dismissed and the impugned order dated 18.10.2021, passed by Ld. Trial Court is upheld."
10. I have also given my consideration to the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
11. I have gone through the order dated 18.10.2021 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate and order dated 03.02.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge. I have also gone through the complaint filed in this case wherein specific allegations have
AI
Allegations requiring investigation cannot be concluded to be civil in nature at an early stage.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that orders made under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. directing the police to register and investigate a case are not open to revision at the instance of ....
(1) Direction for Police investigation – Person aggrieved must first exhaust alternative remedies available to him in law before approaching court of law – He cannot ordinarily approach court directl....
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....
An order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. directing police to register an FIR is not revisable and is considered an interlocutory order, thus barred under Section 397(2).
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.