Point of Law: Power under Section 482 CrPC has to be exercised sparingly and cautiously to prevent abuse of process of any Court and to secure ends of justice.

JUDGMENT :

1. Instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 202/2022 registered at Police Station Nai, Udaipur for offence under Section 365, 392, 394, 120B IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that the complainant himself is a land grabber and the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioner with a malafide intention that too after a delay of nine months of the alleged incident. It is also argued that matter is of civil dispute between the respondent no.2 and one Smt. Hemlata Kankaria and the petitioner has no role to play in commission of any offence. Thus, the complainant only with a view to harass and pressurize the petitioner, filed the present FIR. Therefore, it is prayed that the FIR may be quashed.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submits that it is well settled legal position that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised only in exceptional cases when the Court finds that from the allegation made in the FIR/complaint even prima facie no offence is made out against the accused but in the present case from the evidence collected during investigation, it cannot be said that no case is made out against the petitioner. In fact the petitioner is a historysheeter and as many as 29 cases are registered against him. In the present case also, there is specific allegation against the petitioner for threatening and subsequent kidnapping and assault upon the respondent no.2.

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

5. During investigation, the police has recorded statement of complainant and the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C in which a specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner Dilip Nath for threatening and demanding money from the complainant and thereafter, abducting the complainant and giving beating to him. Thus, upon perusal of FIR and considering the material on record, no case for quashing of FIR is made out in this case. Moreover, as per report received from the SHO, Police Station Nai, Udaipur, as many as 29 criminal cases are registered against the petitioner. It is true that if the material on record is not sufficient to establish reasonable prima facie case, antecedents of accused is irrelevant, however, if the prosecution makes out a reasonably strong prima facie case based on material, in such eventuality the antecedents of the accused becomes relevant.

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. 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 primafacie 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