Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Pallav Tamuly – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
Heard Mr. A.V. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Bhaskar Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent no. 1 and M r. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
2. By filing this criminal petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR lodged by respondent no. 2, which is registered as Dispur PS Case No. 671/2022 under section 498A of the IPC.
3. The petitioner and the respondent no. 2 are related as husband and wife. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an officer of the Assam Police and is currently posted as Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Zone, Guwahati.
4. The FIR contains long narration of events which allegedly took place on 18.03.2022. It would suffice to mention that as per the FIR, she saw the petitioner's vehicle outside a restaurant and when the informant entered there, she found the petitioner enjoying a chat with a lady and she prepared a video recording. All the three walked out of the restaurant and the respondent no. 2 allegedly sat inside the car of the petitioner, leaving the minor child and the maid behind. The p
The court emphasized that the veracity of defense materials cannot be examined at the stage of quashing the FIR and that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly. It also highlighted that ....
The court emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be sparingly exercised and that the court should not interfere with the investigation unless no cognizable offence is disclosed. I....
The court quashed the FIR under Section 420 IPC, finding no cognizable offence and highlighting the violation of natural justice principles in the registration process.
The court ruled that vague and generalized allegations in a FIR do not justify criminal proceedings, favoring the quashing of the FIR to prevent abuse of legal process.
The court held that an FIR alleging cognizable offences cannot be quashed merely based on claims of disability or false implication; the truth of allegations is to be assessed at trial.
The High Court cannot quash an FIR unless the allegations do not constitute an offence; the judiciary must respect the trial process and not supplant it with its judgment on the merits of the case.
Right to protection from sexual harassments is universally recognised basic human rights - Common minimum requirement of right has received global acceptance. This right has been embodied in Articles....
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
