Back
ANOOP CHITKARA
Festus Benson Onwuchuruba – Appellant
Versus
UT Chandigarh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fir registered for forgery of passport. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's argument against belated prosecution. (Para 2) |
| 3. court's concern over delayed prosecution. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 4. court quashes fir as abuse of process. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 11 | 12.1.2019 | Sector 39, Chandigarh | 465, 467 IPC |
Seeking quashing of FIR, captioned above, registered for forgery of the passport, and using the said forged passport as a genuine document by impersonating another person, the petitioner-accused has come up before this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).
2. Petitioner's grudge is that initially, he was arrested by the Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh (NCB) under Section 21 NDPS Act on 30.11.2007, and at that time, the factum of forged passport was very much in the knowledge of the concerned officers of NCB, but they did not take any action. After a much belated stage, i.e., after about 12 years, they lodged the present FIR and want to prosecute him for the abovesaid offence. The petitioner has stated that in the Jamatalashi form, only the number of the fabricated passport
Prolonged delays in criminal investigations can infringe upon a defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial, warranting quashing of proceedings.
The main legal point established is that the necessity of custodial interrogation and the presence of evidence linking foreign travel to illegal activities are crucial factors in determining the gran....
The court enforces procedural justice in issuing passports amid allegations of forgery under relevant statutory provisions.
The court emphasized that criminal proceedings should not be misused for personal vendettas, requiring clear evidence of criminal intent for prosecution under IPC.
Anticipatory bail may be granted where the prosecution fails to demonstrate the necessity for custodial interrogation or present sufficient evidence of ongoing criminal activity.
The court emphasized that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for civil disputes, and jurisdiction is essential for the validity of an FIR.
The judgment establishes that mere alteration of a passport without fraudulent intent does not constitute forgery under IPC sections relevant to cheating and document alteration.
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
