Gujarat High Court Refuses To Quash Extortion FIR Against Ex-ASG IH Syed
The Gujarat High Court has refused to quash a FIR registered against former Assistant Solicitor General and Senior Advocate IH Syed for alleged assault and extortion, stating that the investigation is underway and thus, it is too early to opine on his innocence."If the allegations found to be true, it is a very serious matter as being an advocate and that too, a designated senior advocate...
The Gujarat High Court has refused to quash a FIR registered against former Assistant Solicitor General and Senior Advocate IH Syed for alleged assault and extortion, stating that the investigation is underway and thus, it is too early to opine on his innocence.
"If the allegations found to be true, it is a very serious matter as being an advocate and that too, a designated senior advocate is expected to be an upright and he is supposed to know the law. Therefore, at this stage, no interference of this Court in exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is called for and the Investigating Agency cannot be restrained in performing the statutory duties under the relevant provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure," Justice Samir Dave said.
The Bench of also held that the Investigating Officer must be given reasonable time to investigate the allegations and merely because the Petitioner was a Senior Advocate was no ground to prohibit the investigation.
The Bench was hearing a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 for quashing of FIR for offences under sections 387, 389, 120B, 143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 506(2) and 342 of Indian Penal Code.
The Bench noted that prior to the instant FIR, another FIR was registered against the present Complainant, which was quashed on account of a settlement between the parties. However, it was alleged by the Complainant that all accused persons had forced him to sign certain papers against his will. Syed was also arraigned as an accused in the matter.
Syed primarily contented that he was innocent, and he had been falsely implicated in the case. He also submitted that the allegations made in the FIR were 'absurd' and 'inherently improbable' and that the criminal proceeding was instituted with an 'ulterior motive' to 'malign his reputation.'
Per contra, the APP submitted that the FIR discloses commission of cognizable offence and hence, the Court should not interfere under Section 482 of CrPC. It was also informed that the Petitioner was also not cooperating with the investigation.
Observing that the allegations were serious in nature and required investigation by the agency, the High Court concluded that the Petitioner had 'rushed' to the Court and that the Investigating Officer required time to investigate the allegations. The Court also expressed concern at the gravity of offences allegedly committed by an advocate who is 'supposed to know the law.'
Reliance was placed on Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2021 (19) SCC 401 to explain where the FIR can be quashed:
- Where the allegations do not constitute any prima facie offence against the Accused person.
- Where the allegations do not disclose a cognizable offence justifying an investigation under Section 156(1) of CrPC.
- Where the allegations made in the FIR and the evidence in support of the same, do not disclose the commission of any offence.
- Where the allegations do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only non-cognizable offences and no investigation was permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as under Section 155(2) of CrPC.
- Where the allegations made in the FIR are absurd or inherently improbable on the basis of which there is no just reason to proceed against the accused.
- Where there is an express legal bar in the provisions of the Code or relevant Act which redresses the grievance of the aggrieved party.
- Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused.
In view of the above, the High Court declined to quash the FIR and observed thus:
"Submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that he is an innocent and/or he has not committed any offence alleged is premature and too early to opine on the same without permitting the Investigating Agency to investigate the allegations made in the FIR...High Courts cannot invoke jurisdiction under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings unless no offence is made out on plain reading of the allegations in the FIR as they stand."
The Bench also denied Syed interim relief and dismissed the plea.
Case Title: IQBAL HASANALI SYED v/s STATE OF GUJARAT
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 196