Benefit Of Acquittal Can Be Extended To Non-Appealing Co-Accused If Prosecution Case Is Found To Be Fundamentally Unreliable: Madras High Court Hindu Marriage Act | Petition For Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Serves As A Valid Defence Against Allegations Of Desertion: Kerala High Court Employee Has No Vested Right To Seek Or Retain Additional Charge; Writ Petition Not Maintainable To Challenge Its Withdrawal: Madhya Pradesh High Court Insurance Act | Insurer Cannot Waive Statutory Deadline For Premium Payment Under Bank Guarantee; No Estoppel Against Statute: NCDRC Absence Of Crime Number In Inquest Report & Discrepancy In Sec 157 CrPC Special Report Renders FIR Doubtful: Allahabad High Court MTP Act  | Termination Of Pregnancy Beyond 24 Weeks Permissible If It Involves Risk To Life Or Grave Injury To Mental Health Of The Victim: Gujarat High Court Section 174A IPC | FIR Cannot Be Quashed If Process Server Reports Indicate Failure To Serve At Ordinary Residence: Delhi High Court Issues Guidelines Insolvency Petition | Transferees Of Debtor Cannot Substitute Debtor To Rebut Allegation Of Intent To Defeat Creditors Under Section 6(b) Provincial Insolvency Act: High Court Medical Negligence | Doctor Cannot Be Held Liable For Choosing One Reasonable Course Of Treatment Over Another: Bombay High Court Cruelty | Non-Registration Of FIR Cannot Be Ground To Discredit Testimony Of Wife Seeking Divorce: Jharkhand High Court No Deception At Inception: Calcutta High Court Refuses To Revive Cheating Charges Against Borrower After One-Time Settlement Consumer Protection Act | Doctrine Of 'Caveat Emptor' Subservient To 'Caveat Venditor'; Auctioneer Liable For Sale Of Encumbered Vehicle: State Commission Section 127 CrPC | Past Compromise Not An Eternal Estoppel To Bar Wife From Seeking Enhancement In Maintenance: Orissa High Court States Can Prescribe Higher Qualifications Than UGC Norms, Additional Tests Promote Meritocracy: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cancel Registered Sale Deed Or Adjudicate Title Disputes: Telangana High Court Principal Employer Cannot Abdicate Statutory Liability For Overtime Wages Of Contract Labour Despite Contractual Indemnity Clauses: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Preliminary Inquiry Not Mandatory For Invoking SC/ST Act Provisions If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked For Re-valuation Of Structures Once Compensation Dispute Is Adjudicated Under Section 64 RFCTLARR Act: Telangana High Court Revenue Village Naming | Government Must Ensure Names Do Not Reflect Any Person, Caste, Or Religion Under Policy Guidelines: Rajasthan High Court Section 138 NI Act | Complainant Must Prove Proprietorship Of Firm To Establish Status As 'Payee' Or 'Holder In Due Course': Himachal Pradesh High Court

FIR Registered Against Bank Manager in Husband Wife Dispute – Quashed – Bombay HC

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


Bombay HC observed in the recent Judgement (Shalinder Kumar Vs State D.D. 01 Feb.2023) that the material placed before the court does not disclose the commission of any cognizable or non-cognizable offense by the petitioner. The allegations are absurd and inherently improbable, and no prudent person could reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner.

In a recent judgment, the Bombay High Court has quashed and set aside the FIR and charge-sheet filed against an Assistant General Manager of Bank of India in C.R. No. 318 of 2019. The petitioner had filed a petition seeking quashing of the FIR, which had been registered against him by the BKC Police Station, Mumbai on 17.11.2019. The allegations against him were that he had acted as a middleman in introducing the two families of the bride and bridegroom, and had played no role in the physical and mental cruelty inflicted upon the victim by her husband and in-laws.

The court further observed that despite repeated questioning, neither the learned APP nor the Investigating Officer present in court could justify why the petitioner was being arraigned as an accused in the crime. This was viewed as an abuse of the process of law that cannot be tolerated. The court further noted that the allegations against the petitioner were baseless and without substance, and even if taken at face value, no offense was prima facie made out against him.

In light of the judgment in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors., the court invoked jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and quashed and set aside the FIR and charge-sheet against the petitioner, only insofar as they related to him. The court held that the allegations were absurd and inherently improbable, and that no prudent person could reach a just conclusion that there was sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner.

This judgment highlights the importance of ensuring that there is sufficient evidence and justification before arraigning a person as an accused in a criminal case. It also emphasizes the need for individuals to seek legal remedies in cases where they have been falsely implicated or accused without any basis.

Bombay High court also observed that despite repeated questioning, neither the learned APP nor the Investigating Officer present in court could justify why the petitioner was being arraigned as an accused in the crime. This is viewed as an abuse of the process of law that cannot be tolerated. It was only in the respondent no.1's supplementary statement recorded on 25.11.2019 that the petitioner was accused of cheating by exploiting her father's sentiment. However, this cannot be considered as offenses attracting Sections 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

Baseless allegations against the applicant, no offense prima facie made out. Jurisdiction invoked under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of the Constitution of India. FIR and charge-sheet against applicant quashed and set aside.

Shalinder Kumar Vs State

Latest Legal News