Mere Fact That FIR Was Lodged As A Counterblast Not Ground To Quash It U/S 482 CrPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently ruled that the mere fact that FIR was lodged against the accused as a counter blast by itself cannot be a ground to quash the FIR under Section 482 of CrPC. It is a matter to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, it held. Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy observed,"that the present report was...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently ruled that the mere fact that FIR was lodged against the accused as a counter blast by itself cannot be a ground to quash the FIR under Section 482 of CrPC. It is a matter to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, it held.
Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy observed,
"that the present report was lodged against them as a counter blast by itself cannot be a ground to quash the F.I.R. Whether the allegations are false or not and whether the report was lodged as a counter blast to the report lodged by the de facto complainant or not is the matter to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Therefore, there are no valid legal grounds emanating from the record warranting interference of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the F.I.R at this stage."
The Criminal Petition was filed under Section 482 of CrPC seeking to quash FIR. The petitioners are accused in a crime registered under Sections 341 (wrongful restraint), 323, (voluntarily causing hurt) 324 (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 506 (criminal intimidation) r/w 34 IPC.
The de facto complainant who is the 2nd respondent had lodged a report that the petitioners had attacked him and beat him and also outraged the modesty of his wife. A FIR was lodged and the case was under investigation.
The counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners had lodged a report with police against the de facto complainant and an FIR was registered against him. Thereafter, the de facto complainant as a counterblast lodged the present report against petitioners with a delay of 30 days with false allegations. On this ground, the counsel for petitioner sought for quash of FIR.
The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the Criminal Petition and submitted that there are clear allegations in the FIR regarding the way in which the petitioners have beaten up the de facto complainant and outraged the modesty of his wife. The matter required investigation to find out the truth. The counsel on this ground prayed for dismissal of the Criminal Petition.
The Court observed that the contents of the FIR make clear allegations against the petitioner and these allegations prima facie constitute offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 IPC for which the FIR was registered.
"Whether the allegations are false or not and whether the report was lodged as a counter blast to the report lodged by the de facto complainant or not is the matter to be ascertained by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation," it said.
The Court thus dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Smt. H. Malleswaramma Versus State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 17