Delay in lodging an FIR does not invalidate criminal accusations if substantial evidence is presented within the investigation process.

Judgment :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. The SBCRLMP No. 1797/2025 is filed with the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that your Lordship be pleased to call for the record of the case pertaining to this case. Further this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the orders of the learned Courts below dated 15.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Deeg, District Bharatpur and the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deeg.

Further this Hon'ble Court be pleased to sent back the investigation of this case to the investigating agency 193(8) BNSS (U/s. 173(8) Cr.P.C.) with the direction to conduct the same within a period of 90 days as per the provisions of BNSS.

And pass such other order as may be deemed just and proper by this Hon'ble Court."

and SBCRLMP No. 2619/2025 is filed with the following prayers:

"It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that your Lordship be pleased to call for record of the case pertaining to the First Information Report No. 37/2020 dated 25.01.2020 pending investigation with the Police Station, Deeg, District Bharatpur for offence U/s. 420 and 406 IPC and examining the same in detail, accept/allow this criminal miscellaneous petition; and further, satisfy the ends of justice, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash/set aside the First Information Report No. 37/2020 dated 25.01.2020 registered with the Police Station Deeg, District Bharatpur for offence U/s. 420 and 406 IPC .

Further this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the further proceedings arisen out of this FIR No. 37/2020 registered with the police station Deeg, District Bharatpur.

And pass such other order as may be deemed just and proper by this Hon'ble Court."

2. Factual matrix o the instant matter is that the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 were serving members of the same police department. Petitioner has alleged that the respondent No. 2 has lodged a false and frivolous complaint against the petitioner, resulting in the registration of FIR No. 37/2020 at Police Station Deeg, for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein, it is alleged that, approximately four years prior, in the year 2016, the petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs. 8,00,000 from respondent No. 2 and thereafter willfully defaulted on its repayment.

3. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the respondent had stated of giving money to the petitioner in the year 2016 from time to time whereas FIR qua the same was lodged in the year 2020 i..e, with a delay of approximately four years. Further, it was submitted that the respondent, nowhere in the FIR had mentioned the mode of payment. Moreover, there is no evidence in writing which supports the lending of said amount except in the statements of the other persons who have lent money to the complainant/respondent for further letting it to the petitioner.

4. Furthermore, it was submitted that preliminary inquiry against the petitioner was headed by Dy. S.P., circle Deeg, District Bhagalpur, who wrongly concluded the inquiry against the petitioner and found him guilty in the matter for taking approximately 8 lakhs from the respondent in the name of opening a liquor shop under the name of petitioners’ son. In this regard, learned counsel had submitted that the liquor contract was of total amount Rs. 20 lakhs, wherein petitioners’ son was one of the partners out of four partners, hence assuming the respondents’ story to be true, then approximately Rs. 5 lakhs fall under the share of one partner. Additionally, it was submitted that for arranging the money in que