Delay in filing an FIR cannot be deemed fatal if a reasonable explanation is provided, and the allegations must still substantiate the commission of an offence.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Petition to quash FIR No. 339/2020 for offences under Sections 354, 506, and 509 IPC - Delay of 8 months cited as fatal, but reasonable explanation provided for delay - Allegations in FIR established to make out an offence, not merely retaliatory - Petition dismissed. (Paras 3-10)

(B) Delay in Filing FIR - Judicial precedents establish that delay may not be fatal if adequately explained - Delay alone cannot negate the establishment of ingredients of an offence as alleged in FIR. (Paras 5-10)

Facts of the case:
FIR filed on 16.09.2020, alleging misbehavior by the petitioner on 10.01.2020 including threats and physical intimidation towards the complainant, in an office environment. The petitioner contended the FIR was retaliatory to his complaint against an official of the Municipal Corporation regarding a delayed appointment request.

Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient grounds to continue proceedings against the petitioner, rejecting claims of delay being fatal and the assertion that the FIR was a counterblast to the petitioner's complaint.

Issues: Whether the 8-month delay in filing the FIR is fatal to the prosecution, and whether the FIR is a retaliatory response to prior complaints made by the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Delay in FIR must be scrutinized with contextual reasoning; the court held that reasonable explanations for the delay were provided, and sufficient evidence for the offence was present.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. allegations of misconduct by the petitioner. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments against the validity of the fir. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's analysis and reasoning regarding the fir. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
4. dismissal of the petition. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing FIR No.339/2020 dated 16.09.2020, registered at Police Station Lajpat Nagar for offences punishable under Sections 354 /506/509 IPC.

2. The facts, in brief, leading to the present petition are as under:

a) The present FIR was registered at the instance of one - Mrs. Bhawana R/o 2/8, MCD Flats South Ex Part-II, New Delhi. It is alleged by the complainant that on 10.01.2020, she along with a staff namely, Jyoti was present in the office. When the petitioner herein came to the office and asked the complainant as to why she was not responding to his phone calls and started making videos and taking photos of the office. It is stated that the petitioner further threatened the complainant that his son was working in the office of some Member of Parliament, and, therefore, she needed to work according to his directions. He threatened that if she could not work as per his directions, he would get her sacked from the office and be kidnapped. It is stated that after hearing this, the complainant tried to leave the office to inform about the incident to the authorities. It is stated that the petitioner closed the door and pushed the prosecutrix back and told her that there was no one to help her. It is stated that the prosecutrix then made a phone call and reported the misbehaviour of the petitioner to the higher authorities.

b) It is stated that Mr. K. C. Bhardwaj (S.S.), Central Zone came to complainant's office with his staff to look into the matter. It is stated that the situation got out of control, and the petitioner started abusing and hitting Mr. K. C. Bhardwaj in front of the other staff. It is stated that some members of the staff called the security personnel, who got the petitioner out of the office.

c) The complainant gave a written complaint to the Deputy Commissioner, Central Zone, Lajpat Nagar for taking action against the petitioner for his misbehaviour. Subsequently, the instant FIR No. 339/2020 dated 16.09.2020 was registered at Police Station Lajpat Nagar for offences punishable under Sections 354 /506/509 IPC.

3. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the present FIR by stating that the instant FIR is an abuse of the process of law. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is 75 years old and got superannuated from his service at South Delhi Municipal Corporation. He states that the petitioner is rendering social service for Swachhta Karamchari Union of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi in the capacity of General Secretary of the Union. It is stated that a representation dated 28.06.2020 had come before the petitioner from one - Mahesh, whose request for appointment on compassionate grounds was pending for consideration for a long time. It is stated that when the petitioner went to meet the concerned official, namely, Rahul Singh, Sr. A.C at MCD office, the said official insulted and abused the petitioner, and his staff pushed the petitioner out of the office. It is stated that after that incident, the petitioner made a complaint dated 02.09.2020 against the official Rahul Singh in Police Station Lajpat Nagar. It is stated that the present FIR is a counterblast to the complaint given by the petitioner.

4. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the incident is of 10.01.2020 and the instant FIR was registered on 16.09.2020. There is an inordinate delay of eight (8) months in filing the instant FIR. He states that the delay is fatal. He further contends that there was no reason given by the complainant in the FI