Back
SAMEER JAIN
Amit Kumar S/o Shri Surender Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 for quashing of FIR No. 571/2015 dated 17.08.2015 registered at Police Station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur for offences under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the bare perusal of the contents of FIR and further proceedings/investigation, it can be inferred that the matter pertains to civil/contractual dispute and the FIR was wrongfully registered under the criminal jurisdiction.
3. It is further submitted that in the instant matter, it is alleged that an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only), as an advance was paid to the petitioner under a contract/agreement, by the complainant however, it is alleged that after receiving the said amount, the terms of contract qua registration of the plots were not honored.
4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the above-said, has relied upon the dictum encapsulated in the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment reported in Satish Mehra Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, (2012) 13 SCC 614 more particularly ‘Para-14’ which is reproduced herein:
The court emphasized that inherent powers to quash proceedings should not be exercised if the petitioner fails to justify inordinate delays in filing the petition.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that if the contents of the FIR disclose commission of any offence, the same cannot be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
FIR cannot be quashed on grounds of civil dispute if specific criminal allegations exist; civil and criminal proceedings may proceed simultaneously.
Delay in lodging an FIR undermines its credibility, and general allegations without specifics can lead to quashing of proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash an FIR should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases, as per the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
The court ruled that allegations of encroachment constituted a cognizable offence, affirming that limitation does not apply to continuing wrongs and that civil proceedings do not bar criminal prosecu....
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
