Investigation Should Not Be Thwarted By Quashing FIR If Allegation Of Dishonest Conduct In FIR Discloses Commission Of Cognizable Offence: SC
The Supreme Court observed that when the FIR alleges dishonest conduct on the part of the accused which, if supported by materials, would disclose the commission of a cognizable offence, the investigation should not be thwarted by quashing the FIR.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Appeal impugning the judgment and order of the High Court where, exercising powers under Section 482 of the CrPC the High Court quashed the order, by which cognizance was taken, and all further proceedings.
The bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra observed, “…when the FIR alleges a dishonest conduct on the part of the accused which, if supported by materials, would disclose commission of a cognizable offence, investigation should not be thwarted by quashing the FIR.”
Advocate Sagar Sharda appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Vishnu Sharma appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The Appellant filed a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC, alleging that respondents 2 and 3 (accused) rented his truck under an agreement and paid the first-month rent but failed to pay further dues despite repeated assurances. The CJM directed the police to investigate, and non-bailable warrants were issued when the accused failed to appear. The accused sought to quash the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, claiming no agreement was executed and no criminal offence was committed. While the High Court was hearing the application, the CJM took cognizance and issued processes. The High Court eventually quashed the cognizance and proceedings, advising the appellant to pursue civil remedies.
The Court noted that at the stage of deciding whether a criminal proceeding or FIR, is to be quashed at the threshold or not, the allegations in the FIR or the police report or the complaint, including the materials collected during investigation or inquiry, as the case may be, are to be taken at their face value to determine whether a prima facie case for investigation or proceeding against the accused, as the case may be, is made out. The correctness of the allegations is not to be tested at this stage.
The Court observed, “FIR is not an encyclopedia of all imputations. Therefore, to test whether an FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence what is to be looked at is not any omission in the accusations but the gravamen of the accusations contained therein to find out whether, prima facie, some cognizable offence has been committed or not.”
The Court further observed, “the Court must apply its mind to the materials submitted in support of the police report before taking a call whether the FIR and consequential proceedings should be quashed or not.”
The Court said that there was no justification to quash the FIR at the threshold without looking into the materials collected during the investigation.
The Court remitted the matter to the High Court to decide the quashing petition afresh in accordance with the law after considering the materials collected by the investigating agency during the investigation.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Somjeet Mallick v. State of Jharkhand (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 772)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR Konark Tyagi and Advocate Sagar Sarda
Respondent: AORs Rahul Shyam Bhandari, Madhusmita Bora, Advocates Vishnu Sharma, Shiv Ram Sharma, Pawan Kishore Singh, Dipankar Singh and Anupama Sharma
