An FIR is liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the allegations, even if accepted at face value, do not prima facie constitute a cognizable offence or are inherently improbable, particularly when non-cognizable offences like defamation are pursued via FIR instead of private complaint.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.), the

petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR No.I-

11191041211787 of 2021 registered with the Shaherkotda Police

Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offence punishable under Sections

469, 500, 501, 120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for

short “IPC”) and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising

therefrom.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the impugned complaint is

filed at the instance of respondent No.2 – original complainant, as he

Page 1 of 7

Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 23 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 23 16:42:45 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/850/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2026

was working as Public Notary and also the member of Bahujan

Samaj Party and also running NGO and also publishes magazine

namely “Nyayik Samiksha”. On 05.07.2021, the brother of the

complainant received WhatsApp message which was fake news

from Nimesh Dodiya (accused No.1 in the FIR) and thereafter, the

brother of complainant asked the accused No.1 as to in which

newspaper the news cutting which he forwarded on WhatsApp was

published. As accused No.1 did not reply to the brother of

complainant and accused No.1 used to write message against the

complainant and brother of the complainant in WhatsApp group of

community. So, the brother of the complainant and complainant tried

to pacify the situation on 02.07.2021 and at that time accused No.1

got angry and started quarreling with complainant and his brother

and thereafter cross complaint was filed by both the sides at

Shaherkotda Police Station. Subsequently, on 06.07.2021, the

complainant got fake newspaper cutting on WhatsApp from his

friend. Upon inquiry, he did not reply as to from whom he received

the said newspaper cutting and thereby circulating the said

information, he committed the offence of defamation of present

complainant. Thereafter, it is alleged that accused No.3 was

repeatedly posting messages on social media and defamed the

respondent No.2. Thus, it is alleged that accused persons in

conspiracy and connivance of each other have circulated the fake

news with intention to defame the complainant and his political

party namely Bahujan Samaj Party. Hence, in this regard complaint

Page 2 of 7

Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 23 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 23 16:42:45 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/850/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2026

came to be filed. Except this no allegations are levelled.

3. Heard, learned advocate Mr. Manthan V. Shukla for the

petitioner, learned advocate Ms. Ratna Vora for the respondent No.2

– complainant and learned Additional Public Prosecute Mr. Rohan

Shah for the respondent – State.

4. The role attributed to the present petitioner is, only forwarding

a photograph of a newspaper namely Young Leader, Ahmedabad,

which was forwarded to Nishyal Jashavantbhai Sangani who in turn

forwarded the said message to the complainant. Thus, to attract the

provisions of Section 469 of the IPC, a person has to first forge a

document with an intention to harm the reputation or knowing that it

is likely to be used for that purpose (harming reputation). However,

from the reading of the entire FIR as well as from the papers of

chargesheet, both are conspicuously silent with regards to harming

reputation. Even if the allegations are taken as it is on the face of it

do not constitute offence under Section 469 of the IPC. Not an iota

of evidence is collected during investigation, nor is there any

whisper in the FIR nor in the counter of the chargesheet