Criminal Proceedings Can Be Quashed When Complaint/FIR Does Not Disclose Any Act/Participation Of Accused In Crime: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the criminal proceedings can be quashed when the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered does not disclose any act of the accused or their participation in the commission of crime. 

In this case, an FIR was lodged against the accused and a charge sheet was filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 448, 387 IPC. They approached the Allahabad High Court seeking quashing of the FIR/Charge Sheet. As the High Court dismissed it, they approached the Apex Court.

In appeal, the bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar noted that the High Court has not examined as to what was the complaint and how the present accused are, in any manner, concerned with the so-called alleged commission of crime.

The court then referred to the guidelines issued in State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajan Lal and Others especially the following categories:

(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.

(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.

It noted that the present case is fully covered by categories (1) and (3)

"A bare perusal of the complaint on the basis of which FIR came to be registered at the instance of the de-facto complainant/second respondent does not disclose any act of the present appellants or their participation in the commission of crime. They are neither concerned with the registered sale deed dated 4th May, 1977 nor the later sale deed executed in favour of the de-facto complainant by Shravan Kumar Gupta dated 22nd December, 2018, nor in possession of the subject property nor are parties to the civil proceedings and it is not the case of the complainant that either the appellants have played any active/passive role either in scribing the document or are facilitators or witness to the document in reference to which the complaint has been made for cheating and committing forgery or have played any role in delivery of possession of the subject property in question...What it appears is that the de-facto complainant has implicated the present appellants being members of the family to put pressure for obtaining possession of the subject property and to settle the civil dispute which is pending between Vinod Kumar Gupta, Shravan Kumar Gupta and the de-facto complainant.", the court said while allowing the appeal.

Case details

Ramesh Chandra Gupta vs State of U P | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 993 | SLP(Crl.) 39 of 2022 | 28 Nov 2022 | Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mareesh Pravir Sahay, AOR Mr. Tejas Patel, AOR Mr. Avi Singh, Adv. Mr. Manohar Pratap, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Ekka, AOR Mr. Santosh Kumar, AOR Ms. Sujata Kumari, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Vatsyayana, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, AOR Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Abhinav S. Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Anish Kumar Gupta, AOR Ms. Arachana Preeti Gupta, Adv. Ms. Rita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nisarg Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR

Headnotes

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 482 - Complaint on the basis of which FIR came to be registered does not disclose any act of the accused or their participation in the commission of crime - Criminal proceedings quashed - Referred to State of Haryana  vs Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp. (1) 335  (Para 16-20)

Click here to Read/Download Judgment