The court reinforced that the High Court has limited jurisdiction to quash charges in criminal proceedings, requiring substantial evidence that the prosecution's case is absurd or fabricated. These powers should be exercised sparingly.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. Heard Mr. S.M. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1, State of Assam.

2. The instant criminal petition under Section 528 , Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is preferred seeking setting aside and quashing of a charge-sheet submitted on 25.04.2023 in connection with Dibrugarh Police Station Case no. 1917/2021 and entire proceedings of Police Report Case [PRC] no. 2753/2022, presently pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh.

3. In the First Information Report [FIR] lodged on 02.10.2021 by the respondent no. 2 as the informant, it was inter alia alleged that she was the insured person in respect of a four-wheeler vehicle bearing registration no. AS-22/G-6973 [Maruti Suzuki Swift Dzire VXI] [‘the subject-vehicle’, for short] and the subject-vehicle was insured under an insurance policy obtained from M/s Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. for the period from 12.02.2021 to 11.02.2024. The informant-respondent no. 2 is the registered owner of the subject-vehicle. The subject-vehicle met with an accident on 08.07.2021 and a claim was registered against the insurance policy taken for the subject-vehicle with the insurer, M/s Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. at the instance of the respondent no. 2-insured.

4. The two petitioners herein have stated that they are insurance investigators from M/s Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.

5. In the FIR, the informant had further alleged that the two petitioners in order to investigate the insurance claim made in respect of the subject-vehicle, fraudulently recorded the statements of the informant and her husband practicing deceit.

6. The investigation of Dibrugarh Police Station Case no. 1917/2021, registered for the offences under Sections 420 /406, INDIAN PENAL CODE , was carried out on registration of the FIR and upon conclusion of investigation, the I.O. laid a charge-sheet vide Charge-Sheet no. 195 on 31.05.2022 finding sufficient materials against the two accused persons namely, Hayagrib Biswas and Tirtha Bol, that is, the two petitioners herein for committing the offences under Section 420 and Section 406 , IPC.

7. In this criminal petition, the two petitioners have annexed documents which are stated to be part of their investigation carried out against the claim for insurance made by the respondent no. 2-insured-informant in respect of the damages caused to the subject-vehicle in an accident, stated to have occurred on 08.07.2021. Two statements of the insured-informant and her husband respectively, are annexed to the criminal petition. The petitioners have projected that on the basis of the information collected by them during the course of investigation against the claim, more particularly, the two recorded statements of the insured-informant and her husband, it had emerged that when the subject-vehicle had proceeded from the house of the insured-informant on 08.07.2021, it took an unknown passenger on board against a rent fare of Rs. 50/- collected by the driver of the subject-vehicle. It was on the basis of such finding, the insurance claim was rejected on the ground that the subject-vehicle was involved in hire and reward.

8. Evidently, reliance has been placed on the documents collected during the course of investigation carried out by the petitioners as insurance investigators for setting aside and quashing of the Charge-Sheet no. 195 on 31.05.2022 and the proceedings of PRC Case no. 2753/2022.

9. The principles governing the exercise of jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC vis-a-vis the quashing of an FIR