Criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an FIR under Sections 452, 323, 380, 427, 506 and 34 of IPC was dismissed. The court held that quitting the FIR is not permissible when a cognizable offence is made out and investigation is required.
Petitioner's application to quash the First Information Report is dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 177 of 2019
----
Narpati Mahato
… Petitioner
-versus-
The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
--- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Chandra Prasad Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Laxmi Murmu, A.P.P.
5/ 03.12.2019 This case was filed on 21.01.2019. Defects have not yet been removed. Thus, the case has been listed under the heading “For Orders” for removing the defects.
2. Ignoring the defects, I am disposing of this criminal miscellaneous petition, as it will be useless to keep this case pending. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State on merits of this application.
4. Petitioner, in this case, has challenged the FIR registered as Kuchai Police Station Case No.09 of 2016 for offences under Sections 452, 323, 380, 427, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is an allegation that some persons including the named accused persons entered the house of the informant and thereafter taken away several articles, documents and cash from the house. These allegations definitely makes out a cognizable offence for which FIR has been registered. Quashing the FIR means quashing the entire criminal proceeding including investigation. Complicity of the petitioner, even if he is not named in the FIR, will surface during investigation. Thus, when cognizable offence is made out, even if the petitioner is not named, the FIR cannot be quashed. If there are no materials, summons/warrants will not be issued.
5. During course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has already been framed in this case. This means that the petitioner was summoned under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as there were materials to proceed against him. Furthermore, finding materials, charge has also been framed against the petitioner. 6. Thus, there being no merit, I am not inclined to entertain this criminal miscellaneous petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.
( Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an FIR should be dismissed when facts indicate a cognizable offence exists and summons have been issued.
Whether the quashing of an FIR is permissible when complicity of the petitioner would naturally surface during investigation.
Narpati Mahato
The State of Jharkhand
ANANDA SEN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
