Petitioner challenged quashing of FIR via writ petition. Court held investigation underway under Article 226 warranting no interference, dismissing petition while leaving recourse to law open after police report.
Writ petition dismissed; IO permitted to file report within six weeks. Petitioner may approach law if aggrieved by report.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPCR No. 278 of 2020
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy. Adv. General. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. R.K. Pali, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Chandravanshi
Order on Board
Per N.K. Chandravanshi, J
19-9-2023
2
petitioner, Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Dy. Advocate General for Respondent No. 1 and Mr. R.K. Pali, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.
“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby quashing the impugned FIR bearing crime no. 26/2020, registered at Police Station, Nandghat, District-Bemetara for the offence punishable under Section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, with all subsequent action pursuant to impugned FIR.
10.2 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.
10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set- aside/quash the orders dated 07.11.2019 and 22.11.2019 (Annexure P/5 & P/6 respectively).”
3
Magistrate First Class, Bemetara, alleging that the accused persons misappropriated the fund of Mahatma Gandhi Rojgar Guarantee Yojna, Gram Panchayat, Putpura by preparing the forged muster roll of 32 persons and thereby misappropriated an amount of Rs. 1,39,392/-. After filing of the complaint, the learned Court has directed the concerned Police Station to place the preliminary report on record and thereafter the learned trial Court being not satisfied with the preliminary report, on 20.09.2016 recorded the statement of complainant Sheetal Singh & Chheduram. On 06.12.2016, the complainant Sheetal Singh produced other witness i.e. Lalaram and Jagdish Verma, whose statements were also recorded by the trial Court on 06.12.2016. On 01.07.2019, the arguments were heard and learned trial Court rejected the complaint vide Annexure P-4. Being aggrieved by the above order of the trial Court, the complainant Sheetal filed the criminal revision U/s 397 of Cr.P.C., bearing Criminal Revision No. 24/2019 before learned Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge, allowed the revision, set aside the order dated 1-7-2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class and remanded the matter for passing appropriate order in the complaint filed under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. in accordance with law. Thereafter , the learned trial Court/JMFC by the order dated 22-11-2019
4
directed the concerned Police Station to register the case against the accused persons vide Ex. P-6. On the basis of above direction, the impugned FIR has been registered against the petitioner. Hence the present petition.
5
are of the opinion that no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Sd/-
Sd/-
(N. K. Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice
Pathak/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised to quash the FIR when investigation is underway?
Whether directive registration of FIR by Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was legal if filing was quashed earlier?
Whether party can be detained during pendency of investigation when anticipatory bail is secured?
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Dr. Vijay Kumar Kurre
State Of Chhattisgarh
Sheetal Singh
Jagdish
Ramesh Sinha
N. K. Chandravanshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
