'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

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

07 May 2024 8:19 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