Quashing FIR: 7 Golden Rules

Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226--Quashing of criminal proceedings--Circumstances under which power could be exercised-Guidelines given.  Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 154, 155, 156, 157, 159--Cognizable offence--Field of investigation--Exclusive domain of investigating agencies--Court's interference--When justified. - Section 482--Inherent powers of courts--ExerciseOf--Circumstances necessitating quashing of criminal pro- ceedings--Guidelines indicated. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947: Section 5- -Investigation by designated officers--Express prohibition of officers below certain rank---Whether directory or mandatory--Exceptions only on adequate reasons--To be dis- closed--Authorising such non_designated officers without reasons--Whether legal and valid--Investigation carried on by such officer--Quashing of. Words & Phrases: "Reason to suspect"--Meaning of.case does not call for the exercise of extraor- dinary or inherent powers of the High Court to quash the F.I.R. itself. [307B] State of West Bengal v. S.N. Basak, [1963] 2 SCR 52; distinguished.8.1. In the exercise of the extra-ordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under

Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the following categories of cases are given 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, 

(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 F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investi- gation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section155(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 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 institu- tion and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code;

(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 aview to spite him due to private and personal grudge.In the instant case, the allegations made in the complaint, do clearly constitute a cognizable offence and this case does not call for the exercise of extraordinary or inherent powers of the High Court to quashthe F.I.R. itself. [307B] State of West Bengal v. S.N. Basak, [1963] 2 SCR 52; distinguished.


Date of Order: 21.11.1990

State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors

BENCH: PANDIAN, S.R. (J) REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Civi: Radical Changes in pleadings not allowed through amendment at advanced stage.

 Civil proceedings p leadings cannot be allowed to be radically altered at advanced stage by way of amendment, introducing new facts inconsistent with the original pleading in contravention of the bar contained in Order 6 Rule 7 Civil P. C. (5 of 1908), O.8, R.9, O.6, R.7, O. 6 R.17 proviso - Additional written statement The case of the defendant: she  had claimed in her written statement that she was bonafide co-sharer of suit premises - Whereas by way of additional written statement, she claimed that she was tenant under plaintiff - This was not case of fact not having been stated in written statement and that void being sought to be filled up by way of additional written statement -  defendant sought to completely change her original  stand with regard to her status and claim for being in possession - she retracted from  her earlier stand of being co-sharer and introduced a totally inconsistent and contradictory stand stating that she was a tenant , in guise ...
Read more

Summary Demolition of Residential Building Is Violative of Article 21 -

Image
Summary Demolition of Residential Building Is Violative of Article 21 Of Constitution of India - PDA Ordered to Pay Rs. 10 Lakhs Compensation To Each Of the Victims .  The residential structures of citizens cannot be demolished in a summary manner without following the principles of natural justice and established procedures - such acts violates Article 21 of Constitution of India i.e citizen's right to shelter -  Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) directed to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to each of the appellant. On March 1, 2021, a demolition notice was issued and served to the Appellants on March 6, 2021, with the actual demolition taking place the following day, March 7, 2021. This was done without granting them a fair chance to present their case before the appellate authority as stipulated in Section 27(2) of the UP Urban Planning Act. Among the Appellants, one is a Bar member, and another is a professor whose entire library was destroyed, resulting in their displaceme...
Read more

313 CrPC: False or non-explanation by accused no proof, no link in chain of circumstances.

The Supreme Court observed that false explanation or non-explanation of the accused to the questions posed by the court under Section 313 CrPC(power to examine accused)of the Code cannot be used as link in chain of circumstances to prove the guilt of the accused۔ It can be used as additional circumstances when the prosecution has proved that chain of circumstances has lead to the only hypothesis that accused has commited the crime۔ Justices RF Nariman and BR Gavai of SCI observed
Read more