Powers U/S 482 CrPC To Be Exercised Sparingly, Particularly When Section 302 Is Involved: Gujarat High Court

The Single Judge Bench was hearing an application seeking quashing of the FIR for offences punishable under Sections 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of IPC. The Complainant had filed the FIR against the Applicant in the background of her husband's murder by some of the relatives of the Applicant. The Applicant opposed the complaint on the ground that it was filed with a mala fide intention merely because his relatives were involved. It was contested that ingredients of Sections 504 and 506(2) of the IPC were not attracted.

Per contra, the APP insisted that the investigation had just begun and further, the Applicant was alleged to have administered threats to the Complainant because of past enmity. The APP placed reliance on an independent witness who had seen such threats being made. Significantly, the victim was murdered by some of the relatives of the Applicant. Thus, the ingredients of criminal intimidation were made out.

Justice Mehta noted that the Applicant had visited the place of the Complainant and administered threats twice on various occasions which was affirmed by an independent witness. To address the quashing of FIR, Justice Mehta referred to Neeharika Infrastructure to quote the following essential points concerning sec 482:

1. Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule.
2. Save in exceptional cases where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice, the Court should not interfere at the stage of investigation of offences.
3. The FIR is not an encyclopaedia which must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence. Therefore, Courts should not go into merits of the allegations when the investigation is in progress.
4. When the prayer for quashing of FIR is made, the Court must only consider whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of the cognizable offence and should not consider on merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable offence or not.

Keeping in view these principles, the High Court dismissed the Sec 482 application.

"The present case does not fall within the four corners of rarest of rare which warrants any interference at the instance of this Court exercising extraordinary jurisdiction conferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the complaint at the threshold, more particularly, when there is a past incident of Section 302 connected therewith."

Case No.: R/CR.MA/12599/2022

Case Title: VIJAYBHAI MANSIBHAI KHAVADA (KHARTANI) v/s STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 292

Click Here To Read/Download Order