Kiran Talwar Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kiran Talwar Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the petitioner; the Criminal Original Petition was dismissed and the respondent Police were directed to conduct the investigation in accordance with law and file the final report at the earliest; the connected miscellaneous petition (Crl.M.P.No.17963 of 2025) was closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the First Information Report in Crime No.6 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent Police ought to be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The allegations in the FIR require to be unearthed and the case properly investigated; the investigation must proceed to its logical conclusion — if no evidence is made out the Investigating Agency may file a negative report, but if the materials disclose a cognizable offence a final report shall be filed.

Ratio / Principle

Merely on the basis of the earlier complaint lodged by the petitioner, the present case (FIR Crime No.6 of 2025) cannot be quashed; this Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry into the factual aspects as contended by the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR — Petition under Section 528 of BNSS to quash FIR in Crime No.6 of 2025 of Kanchipuram Police Station, registered for offences under Sections 351(2) of BNS and Sections 66C, 66E and 67 of IT (Amendment) Act, alleging harassment and blackmail of the de facto complainant by sending morphed images and making phone calls from various numbers — Petitioner contended the complaint was an afterthought, following his own earlier complaint before the Chandigarh Police in Crime No.157 of 2024 dated 31.12.2024 (offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 328 of IPC and Section 67 of IT Act), wherein cognizance stands taken in S.C.No.120 of 2025 before the Additional Sessions Court, Chandigarh — Held, an FIR cannot be quashed merely on the basis of an earlier complaint; the Court will not conduct a roving enquiry into disputed factual aspects — Allegations must be unearthed through proper investigation, which must proceed to its logical conclusion: a negative report if no evidence emerges, a final report if the materials disclose a cognizable offence — Petition dismissed; respondent Police directed to investigate in accordance with law and file the final report at the earliest; connected Crl.M.P.No.17963 of 2025 closed. (Single Judge: N. Sathish Kumar, J.; dated 06.10.2025.)

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.17963 of 2025

Kiran Talwar

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Kanchipuram Police Station, Kanchipuram District. (Crime No.6 of 2025)

Avinav Thakur ... Respondents

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records in Crime No.6 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the

First Information Report in Crime No.6 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent Police for the offence under Sections 351(2) of BNS and Sections 66C, 66E and 67 of IT (Amendment) Act.

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on

record.

The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner is that the allegation in the First Information Report is that the petitioner had harassed and blackmailed the de facto complainant on several occasions by sending morphed images and making phone calls from various numbers. He further stated that the present complaint was lodged as an afterthought, following the earlier complaint made by the petitioner against the de facto complainant before the Chandigarh Police in Crime No.157 of 2024 dated 31.12.2024 for the offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 328 of IPC and Section 67 of IT Act, which has been taken cognizance in S.C.No.120 of 2025 before the Additional Sessions Court, Chandigarh. Hence, he prayed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.6 of 2025.

On a perusal of the entire allegations in the FIR, this Court is

of the view that the allegations require to be unearthed and the case has to be properly investigated. Merely on the basis of the earlier complaint, the present case cannot be quashed and this Court cannot conduct a roving

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025

enquiry into the factual aspects as contended by the petitioner. The investigation has to proceed to its logical conclusion. If no evidence is made out, it is well open to the Investigating Agency to file a negative report, however, if the materials disclose a cognizable offence, a final report shall be filed.

In view of the above, this Court finds no merits in the petition

to quash the First Information Report. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. The respondent Police are directed to conduct the investigation in accordance with law and file the final report at the earliest. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

06.10.2025

ham

Neutral Citation:Yes/No To

The Inspector of Police, K anchipuram Police Station, Kanchipuram District.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

ham

Crl.O.P.No.26432 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.17963 of 2025

06.10.2025

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis