Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme  Court Quashes FIR Alleging Robbery and Intimidation, Citing Delay and Abuse of Process**

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, a recent judgment by Justices Ramesh Kumar and Shalini Gupta has garnered attention for its insightful analysis of the balance between law enforcement and the rights of citizens. The bench, presiding over the case, quashed an FIR that alleged robbery, criminal intimidation, and intentional insult. The judgment underscored the importance of timely lodging of complaints and the prevention of abuse of legal processes.

The bench's decision hinged on whether the FIR presented essential elements of the alleged offenses, considering the delay in its lodging. The judgment stated, "The significance of delay in lodging the FIR cannot be understated. Timely reporting is essential for credible investigations and ensuring the rights of the accused are not infringed upon."

Analyzing the criminal antecedents of the accused, the judges emphasized the need to strike a balance between law enforcement and protecting individuals from harassment. The judgment noted, "An accused's inherent right to not be disturbed without sufficient grounds is a cornerstone of justice. This right must be preserved while upholding law and order."

The court deliberated on the abuse of legal processes, cautioning against permitting matters to proceed when there are indications of misuse. The judgment read, "The judicial process should not be allowed to become a tool for vendetta or harassment. In cases where abuse of process is evident, quashing becomes a necessary measure."

The judgment, while specific to the case at hand, has wider implications for the principles of justice and the relationship between law enforcement agencies and citizens. Legal experts have lauded the court's emphasis on safeguarding individual rights without compromising on the pursuit of justice.

Date of Decision: 08 August 2023

MOHAMMAD WAJID & ANR. vs STATE OF U.P. & ORS.  

Latest Legal News