Sold Property During Pending Appeal, Defied Court Order: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sends Man To Jail For Contempt Hostile Witness Cannot Erase a Bribe Demand Already Made on Record: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Ration Officer Three Decades of Unpaid Wages: Supreme Court Strips Gannon Dunkerley of Control Over Sick Company's Assets, Appoints Administrator to Pay Workers by August 2026 Gram Nyayalaya Cannot Touch Family Court's Maintenance Orders — Allahabad High Court Draws the Line Caste Abuse Allegation at Village Jatra Is Counter-Blast to Earlier Machete Attack: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Despite SC/ST Act Bar Contributory Negligence | Not Wearing a Helmet Does Not Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Madras High Court Air Force Can't Punish Officer After Criminal Court Sets Him Free: Supreme Court Overturns 30-Year-Old Dismissal Written Statement Without Affidavit of Admission/Denial: Non-Est Filing or Curable Defect? Delhi High Court Refers Conflicting Views to Larger Bench Bank's Negligence Killed Cheque Bounce Case Before It Could Begin: Supreme Court Rules Section 138 Remedy Lost Due to Stale Cheques Bank Letting Your Cheques Go Stale Is Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Benefit Of Probation Act Available Even If Offender Is Sentenced Solely To Fine: Supreme Court Reporting Registration Of FIR Based On Public Records Does Not Violate Right To Privacy: Sikkim High Court CBSE Cannot Cancel Class XII Results Based on Similar MCQ Answers Alone Without Any Report of Malpractice From Examination Centre: Orissa High Court Magistrate Cannot Summon Bank Officials in Routine Manner on Vague Complaint: J&K High Court Sets Aside Process Insurance Company Cannot Be Blamed When Tribunal's Own Summons Go Unserved and Untraced: HP High Court Remands Motor Accident Claim for Fresh Evidence Dead Body in Accused's Own Office, Employee Killed For Wanting Business in His Name — Jharkhand High Court Dismisses Discharge Petition in Sudha Dairy Murder Case Menstrual Leave Is Not a Privilege — It Is a Constitutional Right: Karnataka High Court Directs Strict Implementation of Menstrual Leave Policy Cheque Bounce Case Collapses When Complainant Can't Explain Source of Rs. 35 Lakh Cash Payment: Chhattisgarh High Court

Supreme Court: FIR Quashed on Grounds of Extortion and False Evidence Charges

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India handed down a landmark judgment, quashing a First Information Report (FIR) based on charges of extortion and false evidence. The case, heard by a bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala, delved into the applicability of Section 195A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the elements of extortion under Section 386 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The case revolved around allegations of threats aimed at causing a witness to provide false evidence before the court. The Court meticulously examined the provisions and concluded that the requisite elements to establish the charges were lacking. In this context, the Court notably remarked, "…there is nothing to indicate that there was an actual delivery of possession of property (money) by the person put in fear. In the absence of anything to even remotely suggest that the first informant parted with a particular amount after being put in fear of any injury, no offence under Section 386 of the IPC can be said to have been made out."

The judgment also delved into the parameters for quashing an FIR, as laid out in the case of Bhajan Lal v. State of Haryana. The Court underscored the importance of considering the broader context and motives behind the registration of multiple FIRs. "In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines," the Court observed.

The decision was hailed as a significant precedent in matters involving the quashing of FIRs. While allowing the appeal and quashing the impugned order, the Court clarified that its observations were specific to the case at hand and would not affect other ongoing criminal proceedings or prosecutions.

Date of Decision: August 08, 2023

SALIB @ SHALU @ SALIM  vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Latest Legal News