THE POWER TO QUASH AN FIR UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. SHOULD BE EXERCISED SPARINGLY AND WITH CIRCUMSPECTION, AND ONLY IN CASES WHERE THE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN THE FIR DO NOT CONSTITUTE A COGNIZABLE OFFENCE OR WHERE THERE IS AN EXPRESS LEGAL BAR TO THE INSTITUTION AND CONTINUANCE OF THE PROCEEDINGS.

JUDGMENT

1. Instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 186/2018 registered at Police Station Gogunda, District Udaipur for offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a FIR was lodged at Police Station Gogunda to the effect that on receiving secret information, the police party reached the road from Tulla to Kathar Road and found one vehicle of silver colour turned upside down. On searching the vehicle, total ten bags of poppy husk weighing 182 kg was recovered from the vehicle. A case was registered for offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act and investigation commenced.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of recovery, the petitioner was not at all present and later on petitioner was implicated by the police on the ground that he had purchased the vehicle. The police has recovered only an agreement to sale and on that basis the petitioner is being falsely implicated in this case.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submits that at the relevant time, the petitioner was driving the vehicle and from the call details as well as other material obtained during the investigation, it has come on record that the petitioner was very much involved in the crime, therefore, no case for quashing of FIR is made out.

5. I have considered the rival arguments and carefully gone through the material on record.

6. During the course of investigation, record from the RTO/DTO was obtained and it has come on recod that initially the vehicle was in the name of Shakoor Khan but he sold the vheicle by way of agreement to Vikram Singh and during the course of investigation, he sold the vehicle on 05.04.2018 to Ramchandra the present petitioner. Further as per call details of the mobile number of the petitioner, the petitioner was driving the vehicle at the relevant time as his location was found at Neemach (M.P.) and then he went from Neemach to Choti Sadri, Chittorgarh and thereafter, he came at the place where the vehicle was found in a pit. A commercial quantity contraband has been recovered from the vehicle and the independent witnesses have stated that the owner of the vehicle is the present petitioner. Thus, the offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act is prima facie made out against the petitioner.

7. Honble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. v. Choudhary Bhajanlal & Ors. : 1992 Suppl. (1) SCC 335] , laid down guidelines for exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR and criminal proceedings. The Court held:

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases 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 inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

1. Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

2. Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in supp