Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Ravi Kant Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of F.I.R. No.4/14, dated 24.05.2014, registered at Police Station State Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code (“in short IPC ”) and Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act (“in short P.C. Act”), against the petitioner and co-accused Kartar Chand and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that a complaint was received by the Additional Director General of Police, State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (“in short SV & ACB), Shimla (H.P.) regarding the misappropriation of government money worth Rs. 3,28,438/- (three lakhs twenty-eight thousand four hundred thirty eight). It was asserted that the Soil Conservation Department had sanctioned Rs. 5,20,000/- (five lakhs twenty thousand) for the construction of protection work in village Kholi Tehsil & District Kangra (H.P.). An amount of Rs. 3,28,438/- (three lakhs twenty-eight thousand four hundred thirty eight
The court established that an FIR can only be quashed if the allegations do not constitute a prima facie case, affirming the validity of the FIR based on sufficient evidence of misappropriation and f....
The court held that allegations of bribery against a public servant, supported by video evidence, constitute a cognizable offence, and FIRs should not be quashed unless they are patently absurd or do....
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 allegations arising from a civil dispute cannot constitute a criminal offence, and continuation of such proceedings amounts to an abuse of the legal process.
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 held that allegations in the FIR constituted a cognizable offence, and the petition for quashing the FIR was dismissed.
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.
The court ruled that allegations in the FIR constituted a cognizable offence, and mere repayment of funds does not negate the wrongdoing.
The High Court reaffirmed the necessity of detailed investigations where allegations constitute cognizable offences, as per the standards established in prior Supreme Court rulings.
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
