Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

In the Absence of the Report, Taking the Charge Sheet as it is, No Material is Placed on Record – Supreme Court on Quashing FIR in Fuel Adulteration Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, allowed an appeal against the decision of the High Court, leading to the quashing of an FIR and charge sheet in a case of alleged fuel adulteration. The apex court’s decision in Criminal Appeal No. 3512 of 2023 marks a critical point in legal proceedings concerning evidence evaluation and procedural compliance.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, stated, “In the absence of the report, taking the charge sheet as it is, no material is placed on record to show that the liquid in the tanker was neither diesel nor petrol but a mixture of hydrocarbons.” This observation was pivotal in the decision to quash the FIR against the appellants, Suresh & Others, who were accused of selling adulterated fuel.

The appellants were charged under Sections 420, 120-B of the IPC and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, for allegedly adulterating fuel with hydrocarbons. The prosecution’s case hinged on the assertion that the seized liquid from the appellants’ tanker was not genuine petrol or diesel but a hydrocarbon mixture. However, the defense highlighted the lack of a conclusive expert report affirming this claim.

The Court meticulously reviewed the evidence presented in the charge sheet and FIR. It noted the significant delay in obtaining an expert report on the nature of the liquid seized. The Court also considered a report from BPCL Quality Assurance Laboratory, which confirmed that the samples conformed to specifications, and this piece of evidence was not effectively countered by the prosecution.

This ruling underscores the necessity for conclusive evidence and timely procedural actions in criminal prosecutions. The judgment emphasizes the importance of having substantial material on record to justify the continuation of legal proceedings against accused individuals.

Date of Decision: 24th November 2023

Suresh & Ors. VS State of Madhya Pradesh 

Latest Legal News