Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has said the High Court owes a duty not only to just look at the FIR  but to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation, when a plea is filed before it for quashing the complaint.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and J B Pardiwala said in frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines.

"We would like to observe something important. Whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely," the bench said.

The court was dealing with an appeal filed by former BSP MLC from Uttar Pradesh and mining mafia Haji Iqbal alias Balla against the Allahabad High Court's order. The High Court had rejected his plea to quash the FIR lodged against him, his brother and three sons on June 21, 2022 under Sections 376, 323 and 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 with Women’s Police Station, Mirzapur, District Saharanpur. 

The complaint was filed by a woman who used to work at the home of the former lawmaker. She had accused Iqbal and his brother of regularly raping her during her stay at the home of the accused. She also alleged Iqbal's three sons used to outrage modesty of her minor daughter whenever the girl visited her.

The petitioner said the allegations in the FIR are vague as there is no mention of time, date, place of the incident. Even otherwise, there is an inordinate delay of more than three year. He also contended after the change of government in Uttar Pradesh in 2017, the petitioners along with their family members were falsely implicated in more than 30 criminal cases at the behest of the ruling party. The state authorities have illegally demolished three residential houses of the petitioners, his plea contended.

The state government opposed the plea, saying statements of independent witnesses have been recorded and the investigation has been completed and charge sheet is ready to be filed. 

The bench said although the allegations levelled in the FIR do not inspire any confidence more particularly in the absence of any specific date, time, etc of the alleged offences, yet we are of the view that the appellants should prefer discharge application before the Trial Court under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). 

"In such circumstances, the Trial Court should be allowed to look into the materials which the investigation officer might have collected forming part of the charge sheet. If any such discharge application is filed, the Trial Court shall look into the materials and take a call whether any case for discharge is made out or not," the bench said.

The court also noted in the case at hand, multiple FIRs have been registered over a period of time, which led to raising of allegation of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge.

The bench also pointed out once the complainant decides to proceed against the accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc, then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all the necessary pleadings. The complainant would ensure that the averments made in the FIR/complaint are such that they disclose the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence. Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not, the court added.

Case Title: IQBAL @ BALA & ORS. V.  STATE OF U.P. & ORS.