Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Ongoing Investigation - Abuse of Process of Law

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has quashed an FIR (First Information Report) and ongoing investigation against the appellants, emphasizing the need to prevent the abuse of the legal process. The apex court held that the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) to quash FIRs should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases where the refusal to do so may result in an abuse of the process of law.

The bench comprising of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice C.T. Ravikumar observed that the allegations in the FIR were vague and did not contain the essential ingredients to constitute the alleged offenses. Furthermore, the court noted the existence of a pending civil suit between the parties concerning the same dispute, which the respondent had failed to disclose. The court concluded that the respondent's attempt to use the criminal proceedings as a tool of harassment against the appellants amounted to an abuse of the process of the court.

Supreme court stated, "Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly and only in rare cases where it is evident that refusal to exercise such power would result in an abuse of the process of law." The court further added, "The factual position reveals that the genesis and purpose of the criminal proceedings are nothing but the said incident, and the dispute involved is essentially of civil nature."

The Supreme Court's decision highlights the importance of carefully examining the allegations in an FIR and ensuring that they meet the necessary requirements to constitute the alleged offenses. It also emphasizes the need to prevent the misuse of criminal proceedings as a means of harassment.

This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary's responsibility to safeguard the principles of justice and protect individuals from malicious or baseless allegations. By quashing the FIR and all further proceedings against the appellants, the Supreme Court has upheld the integrity of the legal system and reaffirmed the importance of fair and just adjudication.

Date of Decision: January 30, 2023

Usha Chakraborty & Anr.  vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Latest Legal News