The High Court affirmed that quashing of FIRs should be rare, and criminal and civil remedies can coexist; the trial court is authorized to direct police investigations under Section 156(3) despite prior orders under Section 202.

JUDGMENT :

J.C. DOSHI, J.

1. Following relief has been claimed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners :-

“A) YOUR LORDSHIPS WOULD BE PLEASED TO quash and set aside the Criminal Complaint filed by the respondent NO.2 being Private Complaint NO. 857/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 471, 120-B, 114 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code on 3/8/2011 in the Court of the Honorable 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat at Annexure "D" to the petition and the order passed by the 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat on 21/6/2013 ordering investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the reasons stated in the memo of the petition, in the interest of justice.

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS WOULD BE PLEASED TO stay further proceedings of the Private Complaint No. 857/2011 filed by the respondent NO.2 complainant in the Court of the Honorable 3d Additional Senior Civil Judge and the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 120-B, 114 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further be pleased to restrain the Police Inspector, Umra Police Station from carrying further investigation in the Private Complaint NO. 857/2011 by order dated 21 June, 2013 for the reasons stated above, in the interest of justice.

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS WOULD BE PLEASED TO restrain the investigation of Umra Police Station and not to arrest the present petitioners in connection with the order passed by the Honorable 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat in Private Complaint No.857 of 2011 dated 21.06.2011 in the interest of justice.

(D) Your Lordships would be pleased to grant such other and further relief/s as may be deemed fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.”

2. Facts of the case are as under :-

2.1. It is case of the complainant that he is founder trustee and Chairman of Bhagwan Mahavir Education Foundation since the year 2002. The Bhagwan Mahavir Education Trust is registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. It is alleged that accused have concocted his resignation letter dated 30.11.2008. It is also stated that accused on 08.12.2008 called meeting of members of trust and also agenda was circulated and on 21.12.2008 resignation of the complainant was accepted in the meeting on paper without informing the complainant and other trustees. It is case of the complainant that it is concocted resignation letter and used the same as resignation of complainant with mala fide intention. On 23.09.2010, the complainant made complaint to the police against the accused. As police has not registered the complaint, complainant made reminder application on 06.02.2011. It is further case of the complainant that as no action was taken by the police, he has preferred private complaint before the learned Trial Court on 03.08.2011 which was registered as private complaint no.857 of 2011 in the Court of learned JMFC, Surat. The Court forwarded the complaint for inquiry under section 202 of Cr.P.C. The concerned Police Inspector, Umra Police Station submitted detailed report stating that since matter is pending before the Charity Commissioner the complaint should