[S.482 CrPC] Staying Investigation When FIR Read With FIS/Compliant Disclose Cognizable Offence Is Grave Injustice To Victim: Kerala High Court

The Court stated that quashing FIR or dropping charges is not legally permissible if the FIR read along with FIS/complaint disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. It stated that the Court should dismiss the petition challenging the FIR so as to enable the investigating officer to continue with the investigation and to ascertain the truth by collecting evidence.

Justice A. Badharudeen said that staying FIR when the commission of the cognizable offence is disclosed would cause injustice to the aggrieved or victim. It stated that staying FIR would halt the investigation process and prevent the investigating officer from collecting further evidence thereby giving an opportunity to the accused to destroy material evidence and to escape from punishment.

The Court was considering a criminal miscellaneous case filed by an accused to quash the FIR lodged against him alleging commission of offences under Section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC. It was contended that compliant and FIR do not disclose the commission of an offence under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

The public prosecutor contended that complaint prima facie discloses materials warranting investigation based on the offences alleged in the FIR.

The Court after relying upon a catena of Apex Court decisions elaborated the circumstances where quashing FIR is permissible under Section 482 of CrPC.

1. Quashment of FIR is not a rule, but an exception in appropriate cases.
2. Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution
3. Court must exercise power ex debito justitiae (in accordance with the requirement of justice) to do real and substantial justice
4. Court has power to ensure advancement of justice and to prevent abuse of justice. It can quash proceedings if initiation or continuation of such proceedings would result in abuse of process of Court.
5. When a complaint do not disclose an offence, the Court can examine the question of fact. It said that Court could look into the allegations and materials to assess if an offence has been made out.
6. Quashing FIR and dropping investigation is not permissible if FIR read along with First Information Statement or complaint disclose commission of cognizable offence warranting investigation. It stated that Court should dismiss the challenge against FIR to facilitate the investigation in such cases.
7. Staying investigation is grave injustice to aggrieved/victim when FIR read with FIR or complaint disclose commission of cognizable offence warranting investigation since that prevent the investigation and would give accused an opportunity to destroy material evidence.

In the present case, the Court stated that FIR read along with the FIS/complaint disclose a prime facie case warranting investigation. It thus stated that quashing the FIR was not justifiable at the inception stage.

As such, the Court dismissed the case.

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates N L Bitto, Mithul T Anto

Counsel for Respondents: Senior Public Prosecutor Renjit George

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 332

Case Title: Vignesh Kumar Balasundar v State of Kerala

Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 2344 OF 2024

Click here to read/download Order