Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

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.

Similar News