Back
2013 Supreme(Raj) 211
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR
R.S. CHAUHAN, J.
Saurabh Gupta
vs.
The State of Rajasthan and another
Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2268 of 2013
Decided On: 10/07/2013
The High Court has limited jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to interfere with an FIR at the initial stage of investigation and should not enter into the arena of investigation, which is the domain of the police.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - QUASHING OF FIR - SECTION 482, CR.P.C. - FORGERY OF DOCUMENTS - CIVIL SUIT PENDING - JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT - INVESTIGATION BY POLICE - CONSIDERATION OF DOCUMENTS BY INVESTIGATING OFFICER.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, Saurabh Gupta, purchased a property from Rashid Khan, who claimed to have inherited it from his father, who was allotted the property by the Maharaja of Jaipur. The petitioner filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against Narendra Singh and Shakti Singh, who trespassed on the property. However, a complaint was filed against the petitioner and Anand Shandilya by Rakesh Katoch, claiming that they forged documents to grab the property, which belonged to the former Ruler of Jaipur.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that it has limited jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to interfere with an FIR and should not enter into the arena of investigation, which is the domain of the police. The court also held that the allegations made in the FIR should be treated as uncontroverted facts at the initial stage of investigation.
Issues: 1. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to quash an FIR under Section 482, Cr.P.C. at the initial stage of investigation? 2. Whether the court can consider the documents submitted by the accused to determine the genuineness of the alleged forged documents? 3. Whether the court can direct the Investigating Officer to consider the documents submitted by the accused?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that it has limited jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to interfere with an FIR and should not enter into the arena of investigation, which is the domain of the police. 2. The court held that it cannot consider the documents submitted by the accused to determine the genuineness of the alleged forged documents at the initial stage of investigation. 3. The court held that it can direct the Investigating Officer to consider the documents submitted by the accused to determine whether the ingredients of the alleged offences exist or not.
Final Decision: The court directed the Investigating Officer to consider all the documents available with the accused persons to decide whether the ingredients of the alleged offences exist or not. The court also directed the Investigating Officer to investigate the case in light of the documents submitted before him.
Accused-petitioner Saurabh Gupta has approached this Court for quashing of FIR No. 80/2013, registered at Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur (South), for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B, I.P.C.
2. This case has rather a chequered history, which is as under :-
One, Rashid Khan claims to be the son of Daud Khan, who was a General under the Maharaja of Jaipur, Sawai Mansingh-II. It is claimed by Rashid Khan that since the Maharaja was pleased with his father services, he allotted a piece of land, bearing Bungalow No. 39, Residency Rajmahal, Jaipur, on 1-1-1950 to his father. He further claimed that he has a letter of allotment, which was duly signed by the Maharaja, on stamp of two Annas, of the erstwhile Jaypore Riyasat. Subsequently, his father expired on 6-4-1970 and his mother expired on 25-4-1996. Thus, he claims to be their only heir and to be in the possession of the said property. According to the petitioner, he purchased the said property from Mr. Rashid Khan through a registered sale deed, dated 22-1-2013. Thus, he is the owner of the said property. However, on 19-2-2013 two persons, namely Narendra Singh and Shakti Singh trespassed on the said property and damaged it. Therefore, on 21-2-2013, the petitioner lodged a report at Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur against Narendra Singh and Shakti Singh. On the basis of the said report, the police chalked out a formal FIR, namely FIR No. 79/2013, for the offences under Sections 452, 427 and 323, I.P.C. The petitioner also filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against Narendra Singh and Shakti Singh, wherein he prayed that they should be restrained from interfering in his peaceful enjoyment of the property. After hearing both the parties, by order dated 9-5-2013, the Additional Civil Judge No. 2, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur passed an order of status quo.
3. However, on 22-2-2013 one Rakesh Katoch, the complainant/non-petitioner No. 2, claiming himself to be the General Manager of the Rajmahal Palace, lodged a FIR against the petitioner and against one Anand Shandilya, wherein he claimed that the property in dispute namely Bungalow No. 39, originally belonged to the erstwhile Ruler of Jaipur, Brig. Bhawani Singh. However, the petitioner and Anand Shandilya entered into a criminal conspiracy with Rashid Khan and prepared certain forged documents. On the basis of the forged documents, they are trying to grab the property, which actually belonged to the erstwhile Ruler Brig. Bhawani Singh and now is the property of his legal heirs. He further claimed that the former Ruler had filed a civil suit against the State Government and against the Jaipur Development Authority with regard to the said property. By judgment dated 24-11-2011, the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 5, Jaipur Metropolitan, had decreed the suit in favour of the former Ruler. He further alleged that when they received a notice under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, then they realised that the petitioner along with Anand Shandilya and Rashid Khan, were trying to grab the said property. On the basis of the said report, a formal FIR, as mentioned above, was chalked out for the aforementioned offences. Hence this petition before this Court for quashing the same.
4. Mr. Prateek Kasliwal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently raised the following contentions before this Court; firstly, a bare perusal of the facts narrated above, would clearly reveal that the petitioner happens to be the bona fide purchaser of the property from Mr. Rashid Khan, who claims to have inherited the property from his father. Therefore, the question of the petitioner entering into a criminal conspiracy with Rashid Khan does not even arise.
5. Secondly, the entire matter is of civil nature. For, there is already a civil suit pending against Narendra Singh and Shakti Singh, filed by the petitioner. However, a criminal colour is now being given by the complainant/n
