HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
ILESH J. VORA, J
DAXABEN DINESHBHAI DAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 14600 of 2020
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Applicant sought to quash FIR for extortion and criminal intimidation after being relieved from her position as a teacher - Allegations of extortion were found to be a counterblast to the applicant's prior complaint of sexual harassment - Supreme Court principles on abuse of process applied. (Paras 1, 7, 10, 12)
(B) FIR - Requirements for extortion - Definition and elements required under IPC Sections 384 and 383 discussed. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
Applicant, a former teacher, was accused of extortion after previously alleging sexual harassment against a trustee of the school. She claimed the FIR was a retaliation for her earlier complaint.
Findings of Court:
The FIR was quashed as it was deemed an abuse of process and filed with malafide intent.
Issues: Whether the FIR disclosed a commission of an offence of extortion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to prevent misuse of judicial process when a complaint is filed with ulterior motives.
Result: Application allowed, FIR quashed.
ORDER :
1. By way of this application, filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the applicant – Daxa Das seeks to invoke inherent powers of this Court, praying quashment of the FIR being C.R. No.11210003200873 of 2020 registered with Adajan Police Station, Surat City for the offence punishable under Sections 384 and 506 of the IPC.
2. The applicant Daxaben Das is appearing as party-in-person.
3. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file this application is that, the applicant Daxa Das was employed as a Hindi Class Teacher by the management of Gajera Global School, at Surat. The private respondent being a Principal of the School, lodged an FIR with Adajan Police Station, Surat for the offence of extortion and criminal intimidation against the applicant Daxaben, inter alia, alleging that, she threatened the trustees of the school namely Chuni Gajera, Kinjal Gajera and the Principal Mrs. Parihar, private respondents that, she will frame them under the false criminal cases unless she will be given amount of Rs. 5 lacs.
The gist of the FIR is as follows:
The applicant Daxaben joined the Global School on 30.07.2018. The private respondent, Mrs. Shweta Parihar was the Principal of the school. The applicant Daxaben was assigned the subject Hindi to be taught in 6 to 10th Standard and accordingly, she had started to attend the school. After her joining, the complaints were received by some of the students and their parents with respect to her rude behavior. The Principal of the school Mrs. Shweta Parihar tried her level best to sort out the issue, but, there was no change in her behaviour. The Principal, had also informed the Trustees of the school namely Kinjal Gajera and Chuni Gajera. The management of the school decided to relieve the applicant from the job and accordingly, she was paid one month notice salary and effect was given from 27.03.2019 and was relieved from her job. The applicant Daxaben was not happy with the decision of the management. She wrote to the school authority that, the one month notice salary is not sufficient and she demanded more benefit in terms of monetary aspect.
The applicant Daxaben filed a complaint against the trustees Chuni Gajera, Kinjal Gajera and the private respondent herein with Adajan Police Station and also to the Higher Officials of Surat Police, inter alia, alleging that, the trustee Chuni Gajera, while she was in the school, met her in the school and asked for sexual favour and also sent adult content on her mobile and was called at his private office and abused her sexually. The matter was compromised and undertaking to this effect after receiving Rs.11 lacs from Chuni Gajera was given to the police authority and based on this, the police was of the opinion that, there is no sufficient ground for proceedings. Despite of these facts, the applicant Daxaben, threatened to implicate the trustees and the principal of the school in a false case and further demanded Rs.5 lacs. In such circumstances, the private respondent in her complaint alleged that, on 29.05.2020 at about 10:30 p.m., the applicant – ex-employee of the school, met her in person nearby the school and told her that, she has not received sufficient amount from the school and she demanded further Rs.5 lacs and if the amount is not given, she will file a false complaint against her as well as the trustees. The private respondent after the said incident, informed the trustees of the school and rushed to the police station where she lodged the aforementioned FIR against the applicant Daxaben.
4. In the aforesaid set of circumstances, the applicant is before this Court by filing this quashing petition.
5. Ms. Daxa Das, applicant-party-in-person, has submitted that, prior to the impugned FIR, she lodged a Criminal Complaint against the trustee Chuni Gajera and others including the private respondent wherein serious allegations of sexual assault and abuse were being alleged, however, in connivance with the police authority, Ch
The court has inherent powers to quash FIRs that are filed with malafide intent or as a counterblast to previous complaints, preventing abuse of judicial process.
The court established that allegations in the FIR did not constitute extortion or criminal intimidation, emphasizing the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offences.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of quashing should be sparingly exercised and only in exceptional cases, and that the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the ....
The court emphasized that quashing FIRs should be rare, allowing investigations to proceed unless exceptional circumstances exist.
The court established that criminal proceedings can be quashed if they are found to be initiated with mala fide intentions and constitute an abuse of the court process.
(1) Mere abuse, discourtesy, rudeness or insolence, may not amount to intentional insult within meaning of Section 504, IPC.(2) Provisions of any criminal statute are to be construed and interpreted ....
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.