Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Hari Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of FIR No. 43 of 2021 dated 29th July 2021, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) at Police Station, Sangla District Kinnaur and the proceedings in police challan No. 24/2023, titled State of H.P. versus Vidya Bhagat and another pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Kinnaur, H.P. (learned Trial Court). (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner in which they are arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate, Sangla filed a complaint before Station House Officer (SHO), Sangla stating that it was brought to his notice by Tehsil Welfare Officer Sangla that the accused-Vidya Bhagat had submitted two different income certificates dated 26th February 2021 with same unique ID number INC 2021224121581656, showing different incomes of Rs.45,000/- and Rs. 35,000. Vidya Bhagat was called telephonically on 7th July 2021. He stated that he had on
The court upheld the FIR against the petitioner, ruling that sufficient allegations existed to constitute cognizable offences, and the truth of these allegations could not be evaluated at the quashin....
The court held that an FIR cannot be quashed if it discloses cognizable offences, and allegations of mala fide do not suffice for quashing proceedings.
The court cannot quash an FIR based on allegations of mala fides or insufficient evidence; it must determine if the FIR discloses a cognizable offence.
The court held that allegations in the FIR disclosed a prima facie case under Section 170 IPC, and quashing was not warranted at this stage.
An FIR cannot be quashed if the allegations, taken at face value, indicate the commission of cognizable offences, and the court cannot assess their truthfulness at this stage.
The court cannot assess the truthfulness of allegations in an FIR at the quashing stage; it must determine if the FIR discloses a prima facie case for proceeding.
The court ruled that an FIR can only be quashed if the allegations do not constitute a cognizable offence, and the truthfulness of the allegations cannot be determined at the quashing stage.
The court held that allegations in the FIR constituted cognizable offences, including voyeurism and assault, and dismissed the petition to quash the FIR.
The court held that allegations in the FIR constituted a cognizable offence, and the petition for quashing the FIR was dismissed.
The court held that specific allegations of assault and trespass in the FIR constituted cognizable offences, thus not warranting quashing.
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
