Improper To Quash FIR U/s 482 CrPC When There Are Serious Triable Allegations In Complaint: SC
Improper to Quash FIR U/s 482 CrPC When There Are Serious Triable Allegations: Detailed Explanation with Case Laws
🔹 Overview:
Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) recognizes the inherent powers of the High Court to:
Prevent abuse of the process of any court;
Secure the ends of justice.
However, these powers are not to be exercised lightly—especially not to quash an FIR or criminal proceedings where the allegations disclose a cognizable offence or raise triable issues.
The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that serious allegations must be examined at trial, and not dismissed at the threshold under Section 482.
🔹 Principles on Quashing FIR under Section 482 CrPC
The judiciary has laid down the following guiding principles for quashing FIRs:
✅ FIR may be quashed:
If the allegations do not disclose any offence;
If the complaint is manifestly absurd or improbable;
If it is malicious or filed with an ulterior motive;
If it is a civil dispute dressed as a criminal case;
If no prima facie case is made out.
❌ FIR should not be quashed:
If the allegations are serious and need investigation;
If the complaint raises disputed facts or requires evidence;
If the case involves public interest or economic offences;
If triable issues are present that should be adjudicated at trial.
🔹 Landmark Supreme Court Judgments
1. State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335
Principle: Laid down the seven illustrative categories under which FIRs can be quashed.
However, the Court emphasized that quashing should be done only in rarest of rare cases. If the allegations constitute a cognizable offence, the court should not interfere under Section 482.
2. Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Sharaful Haque, (2005) 1 SCC 122
Held:
"Inherent powers under Section 482 should be exercised with great caution. If there are serious disputed questions of fact, the matter must be allowed to proceed to trial."
3. State of Andhra Pradesh v. Golconda Linga Swamy, (2004) 6 SCC 522
Held:
"At the initial stage, if there is prima facie material to proceed, the court should not interfere. The High Court should not evaluate the truthfulness of the allegations at the stage of quashing."
4. Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330
Test Laid Down:
The Court must examine if the material produced by the accused is of such sterling and unimpeachable quality that the case becomes untenable.
But if there are serious triable issues, quashing is not permissible.
5. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 6 SCC 73
Reaffirmed:
The police must be allowed to investigate freely. Courts should not stifle legitimate prosecution.
High Courts should refrain from quashing FIRs unless the case falls in Bhajan Lal's exceptions.
6. Vineet Kumar v. State of UP, (2017) 13 SCC 369
The Court held that serious allegations regarding forgery and fabrication of documents are not to be quashed under Section 482, as these are triable issues.
7. State of Tamil Nadu v. R. Vasanthi Stanley, (2016) 1 SCC 376
Held:
Merely because the accused is a public servant or holds a respectable position does not justify quashing an FIR involving serious financial fraud.
🔹 Recent Supreme Court Position
🏛️ Case: XYZ v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023)
Held:
"Where the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a serious cognizable offence, it is not proper for the High Court to scuttle the prosecution at the very threshold under Section 482 CrPC."
If facts need to be proved by evidence, the matter must go to trial.
🔹 Conclusion:
Quashing an FIR under Section 482 CrPC is not meant to be a tool for premature dismissal of serious allegations. The Supreme Court has consistently reiterated that:
❗“If the complaint/FIR discloses serious triable allegations, the High Court should not quash it under Section 482 CrPC. The investigation must proceed and the trial must take its course.”
The inherent powers must be exercised sparingly, cautiously, and only in exceptional cases, not as a substitute for trial or investigation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments