Gujarat High Court
Mehul S/O. Deepakbhai Panachand … vs State Of Gujarat on 30 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 7453
of 2025
==========================================================
MEHUL S/O. DEEPAKBHAI PANACHAND CHUNARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VARUN C DASTOOR(13858) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARESH A PATEL(3822) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 30/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
By this application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the
jurisdiction of this Court to quash FIR No.11191005250022 of 2025
registered before the Khadiya Police Station for the offenses
punishable u/s 64(1),65(1), 123, 308(2), 54 of BNS Act r/w sections
3,4,7,8,17,18 of the POCSO Act and under sections 3(2)(va),3(1)(w)
(i),3(1)(w)(ii),3(1)(r) of the Schedule Caste Schedule Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2. Heard the learned advocate Mr.Dastoor for the applicant,
learned advocate Mr.Haresh Patel, for respondent No.2 and learned
APP Ms.Pathak for the respondent – State.
3. Pursuant to the registration of the FIR instituted at the instance
Page 1 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
of the respondent no.2, investigation commenced and ultimately the
IO concerned has filed the charge-sheet against the accused persons.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that during
the course of investigation the accused persons were apprehended
and taken into judicial custody and thereafter charge-sheet came to
be filed. He would further submit that in fact during the interregnum
period, during the intervention of the family members, the matter has
already been amicably settled between the parties and therefore
present application is filed seeking quashment of the FIR with
consent. Affidavit of respondent no.2 is also filed specifically sating
that all the differences cropped between the parties has been sorted
out and complainant and victim has no objection to quash the FIR.
Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that in fact on the
on the strength of registration of the FIR, the IO recorded the
statement of the complainant and victim. The statement under
Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.PC is also recorded which are placed
on record and if the said statement is taken into consideration, prima
facie, no offence can be said to have been found against against the
applicant. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that
applicant has not directly or indirectly connected with the
commission of offence and no specific averments as well as
allegations levelled against him. Learned advocate for the applicant
would further submit that if the proceedings against the applicant
would continue to run, there are all possible chances that no fruitful
Page 2 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
evidence of commission of offence would reveal and ultimately
considering the totality of the facts, the precious judicial time of the
Court would be wasted.
4.1 Learned advocate for the applicant would further submit that
complaint is registered by the father of the victim and he is not
present at the spot and only on the basis of the story purforth by the
victim, the FIR is lodged and therefore the evidence of the
complainant would fall under the category of hearsay evidence and
therefore if the allegations made in the body of the FIR is believed as
it is, no offence involving the present applicant could be said to have
been found out.
4.2 In support of his submissions, learned advocate for the
applicant has placed reliance upon the decision in case of
Mohammad Wajid & Anr., vs. State of U.P. & Ors., [2023 LiveLaw
(SC) 624] and would submit that the criminal antedents of the
accused cannot be the sole consideration to decline to quash the
criminal proceedings since the accused has a legitimate right to say
before the Court that howsoever bad his antecedents may be, still if
the FIR fails to disclose commission of any offence or his case falls
within one of the parameters laid down by this Court in the case of
Bhajan Lal, then the Court should not delcined to quash the criminal
case only on the ground that the accused is a history sheeter.
Page 3 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
4.3 By making above submissions, learned advocate for the
applicant would submit to allow this application seeking quashment
of the FIR with the consent of both the parties.
5. Learned advocate Mr.Zhaveri for the respondent no.2 –
complainant would submit that since the matter is amicable settled
between the parties and complainant and victim have personally
present before the Court and filed affidavit stating that if the on the
strength of the settlement between the parties, the FIR is quashed,
the have no objection. Such affidavits filed by them is taken on
record and they have been identified by their learned Advocates.
6. Vehemently objecting to the grant of present application
seeking quashment of FIR on the basis of consent, learned APP
Ms.Pathak for the respondent – State would submit that pursuance to
the registration of the FIR, investigation was commenced and IO
filed the charge-sheet against the applicant. Learned APP has read
over the FIR and submitted that immediately after the incident, the
victim had gone to home and had narrated the entire sequence of
incident to her father and on the basis of story put-forth by her, FIR
is registered by her father wherein it is specifically stated that
applicant and other accused had administered threat to victim to
drink the alcohol under the guise of threat administered under guise
of circulating of one video purportedly compromising condition of
the victim alongwith them and therefore victim had taken the drink
Page 4 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
and ultimately intoxicated. In the FIR, victim had stayed for longer
period of three days and at relevant time the so-called incident took
place. Learned APP would submit that on the day of incident, the
age of the victim was 15 years and 04 months. She would submit
that even after the occurrence of the incident, victim was unable to
state the correct facts and these facts are fortified from the material
available on record. Learned APP would further submit that if the
entire sequence of incident as narrated by the complainant in the FIR
is seen, it clearly goes to show that the act is committed by the main
accused – Krishna when the victim was in intoxicated condition and
for three days she had stayed alongwith them and at that time co-
accused were also present with them.
6.1 Learned APP would further submit that in fact applicant –
accused is the history-sheeter and as many as ten offences are
registered against him at the age of 22 years and after filing of the
charge-sheet in the case in question, the applicant preferred the bail
application before the learned Sessions Court which came to be
rejected. In support of her submissions, she would heavily rely upon
the decision in case of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
case of Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr., Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.,
[2024 SCC OnLine 3193] whereby the Hon’ble Apex Court has held
that before exercising the power under Section 482, Cr. PC the High
Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime
besides observing and holding that heinous and serious offences
Page 5 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
could not be quashed even though a victim or victim’s family and
the offender had settled the dispute.
6.2 By making above submissions, she would submit not to
entertain the present application seeking consent quashing and to
dismiss the present application.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and perused the materials available on record, the moot
question, which falls for consideration of this Court, is as to whether
the present application, which is filed for quashment of the
impugned FIR on the ground of settlement, can be considered or not
considering the fact that at the time of alleged incident, the victim
was minor.
8. Before delving into the issue involved in the matter, I would
like to refer and rely upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
the case of State of U. P. Vs. O. P. Sharma, reported in (1996) 7
SCC 705, wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed and held
as under:
“12. In State of Bihar v. Rajendra Agrawalla [Crl. A. No.66 of
1996] decided on January 18, 1996, this Court observed as
under:
“It has been held by this Court in several cases that the
inherent power of the court under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure should be very sparinglyPage 6 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
and cautiously used only when the court comes to the
conclusion that there would be manifest injustice or
there would be abuse of the process of the court, if
such power is not exercised. So far as the order of
cognizance by a Magistrate is concerned, the inherent
power can be exercised when the allegations in the
First Information Report or the complaint together
with the other materials collected during investigation
taken at their face values do not constitute the offence
alleged. At that stage it is not open for the court either
to shift the evidence or appreciate the evidence and
come to the conclusion that no prima facie case is
made out.”
13. In Mushtaq Ahmad v. Mohd. Habibur Rehman Faizi & Ors.
[JT 199 (1) 656] this Court held as under:
“… According to the complaint, the respondents had
thereby committed breach of trust of Government
money. In support of the above allegations made in the
complaint copies of the salary statements of the
relevant periods were produced. In spite of the fact
that the complaint and the documents annexed thereto
clearly made out a, prima facie, case for cheating,
breach of trust and forgery, the High Court proceeded
to consider the version of the respondents given out in
their petition filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. vis-a-vis
that of the appellant and entered into the debatable
area of deciding which of the version was true, – a
course wholly impermissible…”.
14. We accordingly hold that the High Court has committed
Page 7 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
grave error of law in quashing the F.I.R. The High Court
should be loathe to interfere at the threshold to thwart the
prosecution exercising its inherent power under Section 482,
Cr.P.C. or under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, as
the case may be, and allow the law to take its own course.”
9. Thus in view of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, it is well settled that the inherent power of the court under
Section 482 of the CrPC should be exercised sparingly and
cautiously. The Court should exercise its inherent powers under
Section 482 of the CrPC only when it comes to the conclusion that
there would be manifest injustice or there would be abuse of the
process of the court, if such power is not exercised. However if the
facts of the present case on hand are examined, in that event, it is
found out that as per the allegations leveled in the impugned FIR, at
the time of alleged incident, the victim girl was minor aged about 15
years and 4 months, which is an admitted fact, therefore, the
provision of POCSO Act is invoked at the time of registration of the
FIR and if the discretion is exercised in favour of the applicant only
on the ground of settlement, in that event, the purpose of enactment
of the provision of POCSO Act would be frustrated. The provision
of the POCSO strengthens the legal provisions for the protection of
children from sexual abuse and exploitation. It provides protection to
all children under the age of 18 years from the offences of sexual
assault, sexual harassment and pornography. The Act provides for
stringent punishments which have been graded as per the gravity of
Page 8 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
the offence.
10. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the decisions of
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab & Anr., Another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and in case
of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., in
(2019) 5 SCC 688. In the case of Laxmi Narayan (Supra), it is
observed and held as under:
“Quashing would depend upon facts and circumstances of
each case – Court has to apply mind to following – (i) whether
crime against society or against individual alone and kind of
dispute, whether civil or criminal, (ii) seriousness, nature and
category / kind of crime / offence and how committed, (iii)
whether offence under special statute, (iv) stage of
proceedings, (v) conduct and antecedents of accused, whether
accused absconding, why absconding and how he managed to
compromise with complainant – criminal proceedings arising
out of commercial transactions or matrimonial or family
disputes when having overwhelmingly and predominantly
civil character may be quashed when parties have resolved
entire dispute amongst themselves – but such power cannot be
used in respect of heinous and serious offences of mental
depravity or offences like murder, rape and dacoity, etc. –
such offences are not private in nature and have a serious
impact on society.”
11. In the case of Gian Singh (Supra), the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has observed as under:
“61. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be
Page 9 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a
criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its
inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from power
given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under
Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude
with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in
accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to
secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the
process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the
criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised
where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no
category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such
power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature
and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of
mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.
cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s
family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences
are not private in nature and have serious impact on society.
Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in
relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention
of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public
servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide
for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving
such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly
and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing
for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising
from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or
such like transactions or the offences arising out ofPage 10 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes
where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature
and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this
category of cases, High Court may quash criminal
proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between
the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote
and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put
accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme
injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal
case despite full and complete settlement and compromise
with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider
whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of
justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or
continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to
abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise
between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the
ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an
end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in
affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its
jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”
12. At this stage, I may also refer to the observations made by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in Ramji Lal Bairwa (supra), where the
Hon’ble Apex Court has made following observations:
“25. Thus, in unambiguous terms this Court held that before exercising
the power under Section 482, Cr. PC the High Court must have due
regard to the nature and gravity of the crime besides observing and
holding that heinous and serious offences could not be quashed evenPage 11 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
though a victim or victim’s family and the offender had settled the
dispute. This Court held that such offences are not private in nature and
have a serious impact on the society. Having understood the position of
law on the second question that it is the bounden duty of the court
concerned to consider whether the compromise is just and fair besides
being free from undue pressure we will proceed to consider the matter
further. A bare perusal of the impugned order dated 04.02.2022 would
reveal that the High Court has erred in not bestowing proper
consideration the law laid down in Gian Singh’s case (supra) while
rendering the same. The impugned order would reveal that the
allegations contained in the subject FIR was not at all even adverted to,
before quashing the same. We have referred to the allegations which
are of serious nature revealed from the FIR. The complaint in this case
is annexed to the FIR produced in this proceeding as Annexure P-1. In
the said complaint which led to the registration of the FIR reads thus:-
“Hence my report may be lodged and action may be taken against the
offender Vimal Kumar Gupta as he is making pressure on me not to
lodge report.” (underline supplied)
26. In this context, it is to be noted that the complaint which led to the
registration of the FIR was filed on 08.01.2022 and the compromise was
entered into between the third and fourth respondents within a few
weeks thereafter viz., on 31.01.2022. A perusal of the impugned order
would reveal that without even referring to the alleged offence and
thereby without looking into the nature and gravity of the offence, solely
relying upon the compromise, the High Court observed thus: –
“This Court is aptly guided by the principles propounded
by Hon’ble the Supreme Court and feels that whether
dispute is essentially inter se between the parties, eitherPage 12 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
they are relatives, neighbours or having business
relationship and which does not affect the society at large,
then in such cases, with a view to maintain harmonious
relationships between the two sides & for restitution of
relationship and with a view to end-up the dispute in
between them permanently, the High Court should exercise
its inherent power to quash the FIR and all other
subsequent proceedings initiated thereto. Here in this case,
though the offences are not compoundable but the parties
have settled the dispute amicably and that is essentially in
between the parties which is not-affecting public peace and
tranquillity therefore with a view to maintain the harmony
and to resolve the dispute finally in between the parties, it is
deemed appropriate to quash the FIR and all further
proceedings undertaken in pursuance thereof.” (underline
supplied)
27. It is also to be noted that after quashing the FIR and further
proceedings, the SHO of the Police Station concerned was directed
to file a closure report with the concerned Judicial Magistrate
within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of
the order.
28. A bare perusal of the impugned order and in the light of the
observations and binding conclusions in Gian Singh’s case (supra),
bearing in mind the allegations in the subject FIR, it would reveal
that the High Court has misread and misapplied the law laid down
in Gian Singh’s case (supra) to quash the subject FIR and all
further proceedings based in pursuance thereof. We are at a loss to
understand how the High Court arrived at the conclusion that in thePage 13 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
case on hand a dispute to be resolved exists between the parties and
further that to maintain harmony the FIR and all further
proceedings thereto should be quashed even without adverting to
the allegations raised against the 3rd respondent in the subject FIR.
It is also a fact that though in terms of the decision in Gian Singh’s
case (supra) an irrecusable duty of the Court to consider whether
the compromise could be acted upon or not in the interest of justice,
the impugned order would reveal that the High Court has failed to
bestow proper consideration in that regard as well.
29. In the contextual situation, it is also relevant to refer to a Three
Judge Bench decision of this Court in State of M.P. v. Laxmi
Narayan16. This Court held that whether an FIR is quashable or
not would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case
and while considering that question, the Court has to apply its mind
to (i) whether the crime is one against the society or against an
individual alone, nature of the dispute, (ii) seriousness and how the
crime was committed (iii) whether offence(s) is one under a special
statute (iv) stage of proceedings and how the accused manged to
compromise with the complainant.
30. In this regard, it is relevant to note that in the case on hand the
victim was then a student of Class 11th in the Higher Secondary
aged 16 years. The statement annexed to the FIR of the complainant
viz., the 4th respondent itself would reveal that on 08.01.2022 he
complained about the pressure from the 3rd respondent to restrain
him from lodging report. The compromise was entered immediately
thereafter on 31.01.2022. Despite the said position, the Court has
not chosen to consider whether the compromise entered into
between the parents and the accused could be acted upon or not, inPage 14 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
the interest of justice, taking note of the serious allegations levelled
against the 3rd accused and in view of the law laid down in Gian
Singh’s case (supra). In that context, it is relevant to refer to a
decision of a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court in Sunil
Raikwar v. State and Another17. Paragraph 12 therein, to the extent
it is relevant reads thus:-
“12. The father of the victim cannot be permitted to settle the
dispute with the accused. He is not the victim and the courts have
to safeguard and protect the interest of children against onslaught
by bad forces. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the accused is
being prosecuted for an offence that shocks the value system of a
society and this is not a matter that can be permitted to be settled
as a compoundable minor offence. Deterrence to others
committing similar offence is a must and they cannot get a signal
that anything and everything can be compromised……”
31. In view of the very object and purpose of enacting the POCSO Act, we
find no reason to disagree with the conclusions in paragraph 12 extracted
above in the given case. It is more so, when the extracted portion from the
complaint that was annexed to the FIR and extracted hereinbefore would
reveal that the accused was making pressure on him not to lodge any
report. Despite giving such statement in the complaint, within a couple of
weeks, the accused managed to compromise the case with the 4th
respondent and his wife.
32. In the decision relied on by the High Court to quash the proceedings
viz., Gian Singh’s case (supra) and the decision in Laxmi Narayan‘s case
(supra) in unambiguous terms this Court held that the power under
Section 482, Cr. P.C. could not be used to quash proceedings based on
compromise if it is in respect of heinous offence which are not private in
Page 15 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
nature and have a serious impact on the society. When an incident of the
aforesaid nature and gravity allegedly occurred in a higher secondary
school, that too from a teacher, it cannot be simply described as an
offence which is purely private in nature and have no serious impact on
the society.
33. In view of the reasons as aforesaid and in the light of the decisions
referred supra, the impugned order dated 04.02.2022 of the High Court in
S.B.C.R.M.P. No.1348/2022, quashing the FIR No.6/2022 dated
08.01.2022 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto solely on the
ground that the accused and the complainant had settled the matter,
invites interference. We have no hesitation to hold that in cases of this
nature, the fact that in view of compromise entered into between the
parties, the chance of a conviction is remote and bleak also cannot be a
ground to abruptly terminate the investigation, by quashing FIR and all
further proceedings pursuant thereto, by invoking the power under
Section 482, Cr. P.C. In the said circumstances, this appeal is allowed.
The impugned order dated 04.02.2022 of the High Court in S.B.C.R.M.P.
No.1348/2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, the FIR
No.6/2022, investigation and criminal proceedings pursuant thereto
subject to the nature of the report to be filed under Section 173(2), Cr.
P.C., be proceeded with against the accused, in accordance with law.”
13. At this stage, I would like to rely upon the decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure
Pvt. Ltd Vs. State Maharashtra & Ors., reported in 2021 (19)
SCC 401, wherein a three-judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has analyzed the precedent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and
Page 16 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
culled out the relevant principles that govern the law on quashing of
an FIR Section 482 of the CrPC. Over and above that, the scope and
ambiguity of powers to be exercised under Section 482 of the CrPC
has been elaborately dealt with and considered by this Court. The
relevant observations made in the said decision are as under,
“10. From the aforesaid decisions of this Court, right from the decision
of the Privy Council in the case of Khawaja Nazir Ahmad (supra),
the following principles of law emerge:
i) Police has the statutory right and duty under the relevant
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure contained in
Chapter XIV of the Code to investigate into cognizable
offences;
ii) Courts would not thwart any investigation into the
cognizable offences;
iii) However, in cases where no cognizable offence or offence
of any kind is disclosed in the first information report the
Court will not permit an investigation to go on;
iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with
circumspection, in the ‘rarest of rare cases’. (The rarest of
rare cases standard in its application for quashing under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not to be confused with the norm
which has been formulated in the context of the death
penalty, as explained previously by this Court);
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is
sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the
reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations
made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial
stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception and a
Page 17 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
rarity than an ordinary rule;
viii) Ordinarily, the courts are barred from usurping the
jurisdiction of the police, since the two organs of the State
operate in two specific spheres of activities. The inherent
power of the court is, however, recognised to secure the
ends of justice or prevent the above of the process by
Section 482 Cr.P.C.
ix) The functions of the judiciary and the police are
complementary, not overlapping;
x) Save in exceptional cases where non-interference would
result in miscarriage of justice, the Court and the judicial
process should not interfere at the stage of investigation of
offences;
xi) Extraordinary and inherent powers of the Court do not
confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act
according to its whims or caprice;
xii) The first information report is not an encyclopaedia which
must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence
reported. Therefore, when the investigation by the police is
in progress, the court should not go into the merits of the
allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to
complete the investigation. It would be premature to
pronounce the conclusion based on hazy facts that the
complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated or that it
amounts to abuse of process of law. During or after
investigation, if the investigating officer finds that there is
no substance in the application made by the complainant,
the investigating officer may file an appropriate
report/summary before the learned Magistrate which may
be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance
with the known procedure;
xiii) The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but
Page 18 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/7453/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
conferment of wide power requires the court to be cautious.
It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the court;
xiv) However, at the same time, the court, if it thinks fit, regard
being had to the parameters of quashing and the self-
restraint imposed by law, more particularly the parameters
laid down by this Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur (supra)
and Bhajan Lal (supra), has the jurisdiction to quash the
FIR/complaint; and
xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged
accused, the court when it exercises the power under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not
the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a
cognizable offence and is not required to consider on
merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable
offence or not and the court has to permit the investigating
agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR.”
14. In wake of the aforesaid discussion, the present application,
which is filed on the ground of settlement, cannot be entertained at
this stage and it is rejected accordingly.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J)
sompura
Page 19 of 19
Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 01:00:57 IST 2025
