MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

SC: FIR Can Be Quashed In Part If No Cognizable Offence Is Made Out Against Accused

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No.670/2017
(@Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1666/2017)

LOVELY SALHOTRA AND ANR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR Respondent(s)
O R D E R

Leave granted.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 at length today.

We have seen the order so passed by the High Court of Delhi on 19th December, 2016 whereby it has rejected the application of the appellants – herein filed by them under Criminal Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the First Information Report No.520/2015, Police Station Mianwali Nagar, West Delhi registered under Sections 420/494/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further proceedings emanating therefrom. We have taken into account the facts of the matter in question as it appears to us that no cognizable offence is made out against the appellants – herein. The High Court was wrong in holding that the F.I.R. cannot be quashed in part and it ought to have appreciated the fact that the appellants – herein cannot be allowed to suffer on the basis of the complaint filed by Respondent No.2 – herein only on the ground that the investigation against co-accused is still pending. It is pertinent to note that the learned Magistrate has opined that no offence is made out against co-accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 6 prima facie.

According to us, the F.I.R. in question filed against the appellants – herein by Respondent No.2 is only an after-thought with the sole intention to pressurize the appellants not t prosecute their Criminal Complaint filed by them under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Accordingly, we find that the order so passed by the High Court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be set aside.

Accordingly, we set aside the said order of the High Court and quash the F.I.R. qua the appellants – herein.

The appeal is allowed in the afore-stated terms.

………………….J
(PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)
………………….J
(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)
NEW DELHI;
10TH APRIL, 2017.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 MyNation KnowledgeBase
eXTReMe Tracker
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Rules of Group, If You agree then Message us on Above Number.

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh