JUDGMENT :

A.R. Masoodi, J.

1. The investigation of a crime is the bedrock of criminal administration of justice. For this reason, the fair investigation and fair trial is a part and parcel of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. Normally this Court in exercise of its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would not interfere with and delve into the legality of an FIR or investigation but for the exceptions which under well settled principles have been carved out by the apex court in catena of judgements and for our purpose, the broad principles laid down by the apex court in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others reported in (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335, as set out in paragraph 102 being relevant, are extracted hereunder :

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

3. Likewise in the case of Kapil Agarwal and others v. Sanjay Sharma and others, reported in (2021) 5 SCC 524, apex court while emphasizing upon the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR if the same appears to be an abuse of process of law and has been lodged only to harass the accused, has observed as under :

“18. However, at the same time, if it is found that the subsequent FIR is an abuse of process of law and/or the same has been lodged only to harass the accused, the same can be quashed in exer