Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Delhi High Court Quashes FIR in Alleged Acid Attack Case: Inherent Improbability of Allegations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed FIR No.264/2017, pertaining to an alleged acid attack incident dating back to 2017. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal delivered the judgment on November 8, 2023, highlighting the “inherent improbability” of the allegations against the petitioner.

The case involved accusations against the petitioner of throwing acid on the respondent no.2, leading to registration of the FIR under Sections 326-B/506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Shalimar Bagh. However, upon close scrutiny of the medical and police records, which failed to show any external injuries on the respondent or signs of acid, the court found substantial inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case.

Justice Bansal observed, “The judicial conscience of this Court is satisfied that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner are a misuse of the process of the Court and an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer and ought to be quashed.” This statement was pivotal in the decision to terminate the proceedings, underscoring the court’s stance on preventing the misuse of legal processes.

The court also addressed the underlying property dispute between the parties, acknowledging it as the root cause behind the mala fide initiation of the proceedings. The judgment emphasized the responsible use of the judicial system and the importance of ensuring that criminal charges are not leveraged as tools in personal vendettas.

Advocates representing both sides presented their arguments, but the court, guided by precedents set by the Supreme Court, ultimately decided in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the charges against her.

This ruling serves as a reminder of the High Court’s authority under Section 482 of the CrPC to intervene in cases where legal processes are being abused, thereby upholding the principles of justice. The legal fraternity views this judgment as a reinforcement of the judicial system’s role in safeguarding individuals against unfounded criminal accusations.

Date of Decision: 08 November 2023

RASHMEE KANSAL VS THE STATE AND ANR.

Latest Legal News