Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Arup Chatterjee S/o Anup Chatterjee – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Injdrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Kapil Sibbal, the learned Senior Counsel appearing through Video Conferencing along with Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel as well as Mr. Deepankar Roy, the learned counsel, present in the Court Room appearing on behalf of the respondent-State as well as Mr. A.K. Das, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Saurav Kumar, the learned vice counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Enforcement Directorate [E.D.].
2. The prayer in the writ petition is made to show cause upon the respondents as to how and under what circumstances on-line complaint lodged by the petitioner on 11.05.2024 at 10.00 a.m. as contained in Annexure-1 has not been registered till date and the investigation has not been started and upon seeking response from the respondents to register the FIR under the relevant provisions of law and to go ahead with the prosecuting against the persons who are involved in the commission of the alleged offence as narrated in the Annexure-1 submitted by the petitioner on-line for registration of the F.I.R. on 11.05.2024 at 10.04 a.m. which has not been re
The court emphasized that FIR registration is mandatory for cognizable offences, rejecting locus standi as a barrier to filing complaints.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the writ of mandamus can be declined when seeking to direct registration of FIR before exhausting the available statutory remedies under Cr.P.....
The accused has no right to a hearing before the registration of an FIR, and anyone can initiate criminal proceedings unless explicitly barred by law.
The main legal point established is the mandatory registration of FIR if the information discloses a cognizable offence and the need for a preliminary inquiry in certain cases. The court emphasized t....
It is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the ingredients of....
The court affirmed that senior officials cannot obstruct FIR registration and must adhere to legal protocols, emphasizing accountability in law enforcement.
Point of Law : Dismissal of petition to Quash of FIR – Commission of cognizable offence and pendency of investigation – cannot be quashed.
Point of law : There is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-sheet constitutes the....
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
