Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Permissive Use Cannot Ripen into Right of Prescriptive Easement: Kerala High Court High Court Slams Procedural Delays, Orders FSL Report in Assault Case to Prevent Miscarriage of Justice Petitioner Did Not Endorse Part-Payments on Cheque; Section 138 NI Act Not Attracted: Madras High Court Minority Christian Schools Not Bound by Rules of 2018; Disciplinary Proceedings Can Continue: High Court of Calcutta Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights Home Station Preferences Upheld in Transfer Case: Kerala High Court Overrules Tribunal on Teachers' Transfer Policy Failure to Formally Request Cross-Examination Does Not Invalidate Assessment Order: Calcutta High Court

Delhi High Court Dismisses Petition to Quash FIR in Fake Email and Impersonation Case; Upholds Ongoing Investigation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of FIR No. 171/2023, registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including 417/419/468/471/120B. The FIR involves allegations of creating fake email IDs and impersonation for filing false complaints against a government officer.

Justice Amit Sharma, presiding over the matter, observed, "The present case involves two versions – one of the petitioner and one of the complainant, which requires due investigation." This observation came in light of the complexities surrounding the allegations against the petitioner, A.V. Prem Nath, who is accused of conspiring to file false complaints against a Special Secretary in the Delhi Government.

The court meticulously reviewed the background of the case, where the complainant alleged that he was induced by the petitioner under the promise of employment, leading to the creation of false documents and emails. The investigation so far has revealed significant evidence, including phone records and email correspondence, suggesting the petitioner's involvement in the alleged crimes.

Highlighting the principles from various judicial precedents, the court stated, "The jurisdiction to exercise inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing an FIR has been the subject matter of various judicial precedents." The court emphasized that such powers should be exercised sparingly and only when justifiably warranted, which was not found to be the case here.

In an interesting turn, the court also delved into the legality of evidence procurement. Justice Sharma noted, "Evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not liable to be shut out if relevant." This statement aligns with the court's stance of prioritizing the relevance and significance of evidence over the means of its acquisition.

The decision to dismiss the petition for quashing the FIR underlines the court's commitment to allowing the ongoing investigation to unfold. The court made it clear that its observations were not a comment on the merits of the case but rather a procedural stance, emphasizing the need for a thorough and fair investigation.

Date of Decision: 22 January, 2024

A.V. PREM NATH VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

 

Similar News