2015 (12) TMI 1036 - HC - Indian Laws

Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR - whether powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised in this case? - Held that - There are allegations which constitutes an offence. Adequate material has been collected by the prosecution which they would prove at the trial. Considering the allegations and in view of the principles enunciated above, it is of the view that it is not a fit case where the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised.

Summary

Issues:
Petition seeking quashing of FIR under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B IPC.
Exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Application of principles for quashing proceedings.

Analysis:

1. Petition for Quashing FIR:
The petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought the quashing of FIR registered under various sections of IPC. The allegations involved the driver of a vehicle owned by a transport company attempting to register forms without the actual presence of the vehicle or goods, leading to suspicions of forged documents with intent to deceive the government. The investigation concluded with the presentation of a challan against the driver and the owner of the transport company. The petitioner contended that they were unnecessarily involved and named as an accused without any allegations of benefiting from the actions. The State argued that the investigation revealed the involvement of two individuals, leading to the challan being presented against them under relevant IPC sections.

2. Exercise of Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.:
The primary issue examined was whether the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised in this case. The Court highlighted that the inherent power under this section is an exception and not the rule, with three circumstances under which it can be utilized: to give effect to an order under the Code, prevent abuse of court process, or secure the ends of justice. Referring to legal precedents, the Court emphasized that this power should be sparingly exercised, especially in cases involving cognizable offenses, to prevent abuse of the legal process or secure justice. The Court outlined categories where inherent power can be exercised to quash proceedings, emphasizing the need for a prima facie case against the accused.

3. Application of Principles for Quashing Proceedings:
In light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the Court analyzed the facts of the case and found that the allegations constituted an offense, supported by adequate material collected by the prosecution. The Court concluded that the case did not fall within the categories where the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised. Therefore, the petition seeking quashing of the FIR was dismissed, indicating that the matter should proceed to trial based on the evidence collected during the investigation.

In summary, the judgment addressed the petition seeking the quashing of an FIR under various IPC sections, analyzed the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and applied legal principles to determine the appropriateness of quashing the proceedings. The Court emphasized the need for a prima facie case against the accused and concluded that the case did not warrant the exercise of inherent powers to quash the FIR, leading to the dismissal of the petition.