Back
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Dharmendra Singh Maurya – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. - The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR bearing No. 0571/2023, registered at Police Station Harsh Vihar, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 419/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner herein is presently posted as Deputy Superintendent at Central Jail No. 12, Mandoli Jail Complex, Delhi. On 01.11.2022, an anonymous typed written complaint was received in the office of the learned District Judge, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, alleging that the petitioner subjected every new under-trial prisoner (`UTP') to harassment and extorted money from their family members. It is also alleged that some inmates, in collusion with the petitioner, facilitate this extortion by transferring significant sums through Paytm under the guise of providing amenities. The petitioner has allegedly established special barracks in each ward, entrusting their operation to selected inm
The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly and only in the 'rarest of rare cases'. The judiciary should not interfere with the investigation of offenses unless there is a risk of miscarriage....
A second FIR is permissible if it presents new facts or different allegations, necessitating a proper investigation by the police.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that serious allegations, such as those involving extortion and physical assault, cannot be quashed based on a settlement agreement at the initial ....
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....
Quashing of FIR should be an exception and rarity, and the court cannot inquire into the reliability or genuineness of the allegations in the FIR.
Exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing an FIR should be sparingly and carefully exercised, and the court cannot examine disputed questions of fact at this stage.
The limited scope of inquiry at the stage of framing charges and the prima facie nature of the offences were central legal principles established in the judgment.
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
