Anwar Ahmed vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Bishnoi, J.—These two Criminal Misc. Petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for quashing the FIR No. 275/2013 dated 06.10.2013 and FIR No. 276/2013 dated 07.10.2013 of Police Station, Makrana, District Nagaur, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 447, 379 and 504 IPC and for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 IPC respectively.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned FIRs are registered at the instance of the respondent No. 2 on account of some dispute in relation to Marble Mine and the allegations levelled in the impugned FIRs are totally false. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that in fact the complainant party has committed offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 452 and 395 IPC and when the complainant came to know that the petitioner is going to file an FIR for the same he lodged impugned FIRs against the petitioner and the other co-accused persons. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the impugned FIRs may kindly be quashed.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has argued that from the bare perusal of contents of impugned FIRs constitute prima facie case of cognizable offence against the petitioner is made out and, therefore, no case of quashing the impugned FIRs are made out and no interference is called for while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Hence, these Criminal Misc. Petitions are liable to be dismissed.

Learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted the factual reports dated 17.11.2014 and 23.11.2014 prepared by the SHO, Police Station, Makrana, Nagaur, wherein it is mentioned that after thorough investigation the police has concluded that ample evidence is available on record to file charge-sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 447, 379 and 504 IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned FIRs.

Hon''ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, has examined the powers of the High Court of quashing First Information Report lodged in any police station while exercising the power under Article 226 of Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and has held as under:-

"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 extra-ordinary 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 F.I.R. 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 F.I.R. 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.

We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice."

In a later decision the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj and another Vs. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill and another, has reiterated the above principle.

In the instant case, after reading the contents of the impugned FIRs, it cannot be said that the allegations levelled by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioner do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. At this stage it cannot be said that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the impugned FIRs.

In such circumstances, in the light of the principle laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in above referred cases, this Court does not find any merit in these Criminal Misc. Petitions as the petitioner has failed to make out a case for quashing the impugned FIRs.

Hence there is no force in these Criminal Misc. Petitions and the same are hereby dismissed.

Stay petitions are also dismissed.

The factual reports dated 17.11.2014 and 23.11.2014 be taken on record.

It is very sorry state of affairs that in both the factual reports it is mentioned that the charge-sheet against the petitioner has been prepared on 28.03.2014, but till date the same has not been filed in the concerned court. The Superintendent of Police, Nagaur shall take into consideration this aspect of the matter and instruct the concerned Investigating Officer to file charge-sheet immediately before the concerned Court after the preparation of it.

Copy of this order be sent to Superintendent of Police, Nagaur.