Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 694

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, J.B. PARDIWALA, JJ.
Salib @ Shalu @ Salim – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 2344 of 2023, S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 3152 of 2023
Decided On : 08-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mohd. Zahid Hussain, AOR Ms. Jemtiben Ao, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Garima Prasad, Sr. Adv., A.A.G. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Mr. Harsh Pratap Shahi, Adv. Mr. Bharpur Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Prateek Rai, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Shashank Gusain, Adv. Mr. Shubham Saxena, Adv. Mr. Akash, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of Constitution need not restrict itself only to stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to initiation/registration of case as well as materials collected in course of investigation.
(2) Section 195A of IPC is a cognizable offence – In a cognizable offence, police has power to investigate – To give threat to a person to withdraw a complaint or FIR or settle dispute would not attract Section 195A of IPC.

Headnote:
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Whenever accused comes before Court invoking either inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution to get FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances Court owes a duty to look into FIR with care and a little more closely – Once complainant decides to proceed against accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, then he would ensure that FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all necessary pleadings – Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of Constitution need not restrict itself only to stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to initiation/registration of case as well as materials collected in course of investigation. (Para 26)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 195A – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 195A – Administration of threat – Section 195A of IPC is a cognizable offence – In a cognizable offence, police has power to investigate – Section 195A of Cr.P.C. provides remedy of filing complaint – If a witness or any other person receives threats and such threats are administered with intent to cause that person to give false evidence before Court, then such witness or person can file a complaint in relation to offence under Section 195A of IPC. (Paras 18 and 19)
(C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 147, 148, 149, 195A, 385, 504 and 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 195A – Criminal intimidation and extortion – Quashing of criminal proceedings – False evidence means false evidence before Court of law – To give threat to a person to withdraw a complaint or FIR or settle dispute would not attract Section 195A of IPC – None of ingredients to constitute offence punishable under Section 195A of IPC are disclosed in facts of present case – In extortion, will of victim has to be overpowered by putting him or her in fear of injury – Forcibly taking any property will not come under this definition – In absence of anything to even remotely suggest that first informant parted with a particular amount after being put to fear of any injury, no offence under Section 386 of IPC can be said to have been made out – Entire case put up by first informant on face of it appears to be concocted and fabricated – Criminal proceedings quashed. (Paras 16, 19, 22, 24, 25 and 28)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal is at instance of accused charged with offence punishable under Section 506 of Indian Penal Code in connection with First Information Report registered with Mirzapur Police Station, District Saharanpur, State of U.P. and is directed against order passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 17.10.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 13339 of 2022 filed by appellant herein for quashing of FIR by which High Court rejected Writ Petition and thereby declined to quash FIR.
Findings of Court:
FIR No. 175 of 2022 dated 11.08.2022 deserves to be quashed in so far as appellant herein is concerned. As State believes that father-in-law of appellant namely Iqbal @ Bala is a very hardened criminal, his son-in-law i.e., present appellant who has been implicated in further statement of the first informant is also a criminal.
Result : Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

J.B. PARDIWALA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is at the instance of an accused charged with the offence punishable under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) in connection with the First Information Report (FIR) No. 175 of 2022 dated 11.08.2022 registered with the Mirzapur Police Station, District Saharanpur, State of U.P. and is directed against the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 17.10.2022 passed in the Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 13339 of 2022 filed by the appellant herein for quashing of the aforesaid FIR by which the High Court rejected the Writ Petition and thereby declined to quash the FIR referred to above.

3. The FIR dated 11.08.2022 lodged by the respondent No. 4 herein reads thus:

The S.H.O.

Police Station Mirzapur Paul,

District Saharanpur.

Respectfully submitted that the applicant Husna wife of Irafan resident of village Mirzapur Paul police station Mirzapur Paul, District Saharanpur had submitted an application in Mahila thana against Iqbal @ Bala and his associates being Case Crime No. 122/22 u/s 376D, 323, 120B, 452 IPC which is under investigation. Due to this reason Khursheed son of Asagar and Farooq son Mustak and Maharaj wife of Faroq residents of Shahpur Gadda, Police Station Mirzapur Paul, District Saharanpur are threatening me the complainant. They told me on phone and face to face that if you have not settled this case then you and your family will be killed and Suleman Kabadi has shown me pistol and told that we are companions of Iqbal @ Balla. If there has not been any decision then should remain ready to suffer consequences. Your are requested to take legal action. I shall remain obliged.”

4. Thus it appears on a plain reading of the aforesaid FIR that the victim namely Husna (respondent No. 3 herein) had earlier lodged an FIR No. 122 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 376D, 323, 120B, 354A and 452 resply of the IPC and under Sections 7 and 8 resply of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 against Haji Iqbal @ Bala (father-in-law of the appellant herein), Mehmood, Javed, Alishan, Afjal and Dilshad. It is alleged that while the investigation of the FIR No. 122 of 2022 referred to above was going on, the accused persons namely Khurshid, Farukh, Maharaj and Suleman had telephonically as well as in person threatened the victim saying that they are the associates of Iqbal alias Bala and that if she would not withdraw the said FIR No. 122 of 2022, then she as well as her family members would be killed.

5. The appellant herein went before the High Court by way of filing the Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 13339 of 2022 with a prayer to quash the FIR lodged against him. The High Court declined to quash the FIR vide the impugned order dated 17.10.2022. The order reads thus:

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the impugned FIR dated 11.08.2022 registered as Case Crime No. 175 of 2022 under Section 506 IPC Police Station Mirzapur, District Saharanpur.

Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/ vexatious/mischievous allegations and no offences are made out against the petitioner.

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence.

Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of notification No. 1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019 and therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhaja