The court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 to quash an FIR due to lack of prima facie evidence against the petitioner, emphasizing the need to prevent abuse of judicial process.

ORDER :

(J.C. DOSHI, J.) 

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice  of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report bearing Prohibition C.R. No.5073 of 2019 registered with DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 65(A)(E), 81, 83, 98(2), 116(B) the Gujarat Prohibition Act and under Sections 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the proceedings initiated in pursuant thereto.

3. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner was earlier having a licensed shop of liquor for a period of one year in the year 2017-2018 and was running the said shop as per rules and regulations. When the petitioner was operating this licensed shop, several persons used to come to this shop but no offences of prohibition were registered against the petitioner either in Rajasthan or Gujarat. It is urged that several persons used to come to take liquor illegally to which the petitioner refused and hence because of animosity, the present FIR has been registered and the petitioner is shown as absconding accused in the charge-sheet with a malafide intention.

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner Mr. R.J. Goswami, submitted that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR and his name was revealed only during investigation when the statement of the co-accused was taken, the co- accused are named in the FIR. It is further submitted that the persons who are named in the FIR have faced the trial qua Criminal Case No.100404 of 2019, which has resulted into acquittal. Learned advocate for the petitioner has also placed on record the copy of the above judgment and has submitted that the role of the present petitioner as alleged is much lesser than that of the persons who are named in the FIR and therefore, urged that the impugned complaint may be quashed and set aside.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that any First Information Report should be quashed in accordance with the guidelines of the Apex Court and the parameters laid down therein and submitted that necessary orders of dismissal may be passed by this Court.

6. This Court has heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and has perused the material on record. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is noticed by this Court that the persons who have been named in the FIR / charge-sheet have faced the trial. Criminal Case No.100404 of 2019 was conducted against the other accused who have been charge-sheeted / mentioned in the FIR and they have been acquitted vide order dated 26.02.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.100404 of 2019 by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.11, Ahmedabad. The role of the present petitioner in the charge-sheet is stated to be much lesser than that of role of the other co-accused named in the FIR.

7. In the case of State of Haryana V. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, the Apex Court formulated as many as seven categories of cases, wherein the extraordinary power under Section 482 could be exercised by the High Court to prevent abuse of process of the court. It was clarified that it was not possible to lay down precise and inflexible guidelines or any rigid formula or to give an exhaustive list of circumstances in which such power could be exercised. In this case, the Apex Court made the following observations:-

“8.1. In the exercise of the extra-ordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the following categories of cases are given by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexib