The Author, Shiv Kumar is a 1st Year student pursuing B.A LLB from Dr. B. R. Ambedkar National Law University, Sonipat, Haryana. He is currently interning with LatestLaws.com.
Introduction
Everyone must have come across the term FIR at some point, but very few people are aware of the laws surrounding it. In this article, I will discuss one of these laws, specifically, the laws surrounding the quashing of an FIR. This article will answer questions like 'What is an FIR? 'The procedure to quash an FIR?', 'What are the laws regarding the quashing of an FIR?’ and some case laws.
First Information Report
In simpler terms, it is a document prepared by the police that contains information regarding an offence. The Indian Penal Code, 1860(IPC) and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) or any other law do not contain the term FIR, but in regulations of police, it is information that is recorded under Section 154 of CrPC.
According to Section 154 of CrPC, there are three main elements of an FIR:
- Information under this section should be of cognizable offence.
- This information should be given to the head of that police station; it can be given in writing or orally.
- Information should be reduced in writing, it must be signed by the informant and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe.
The informant is also entitled to get a copy of that FIR free of cost.
Quashing of an FIR
Quashing of an FIR means that such FIR is no longer valid and it ceases to be backed by the force of law, when an FIR is quashed, the legal machinery is stopped to act on the same. There are many instances where a frivolous FIR is registered, the substance in the FIR is not qualified to be registered in an FIR, the basic ingredients of an FIR are not fulfilled, and the parties settle their disputes through mediation or any other dispute resolution mechanism or the court finds that the case does not qualify the merits.
Who can quash an FIR? This question is answered in Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Section 482 states “nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice”
High Courts have the inherent power to quash any FIR or complaint based on merits. To meet the ends of justice, the court has the power not only under this section but also under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to pass an order of quashing. Apart from High Courts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India also has the power to quash an FIR by using its power under Article 136 when a special leave petition is filed or under Article 142 to do complete justice.
The process of quashing begins after filing a petition under Section 482 of CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioner needs to convince the Hon’ble High Court that the FIR registered must be quashed. Grounds of quashing can be different for each case, like in matrimonial cases or financial disputes if parties have already settled the matter or if there is a serious crime involved but the person against whom such FIR is filed can prove that there is no link between the commission of the crime and him or the FIR is registered with mala fide intent.
Parameters by SC
There are some parameters upon satisfaction of which a High Court can deal with the quashing of an FIR; it was the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, in which the Supreme Court laid down those parameters.
The High Court can quash an FIR or a complaint in the exercise of its powers under “Article 226 of the Constitution of India or under section 482 CrPC:
- Where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
- Where the allegations in the FIR and other materials accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence justifying an investigation under section 156(1) of CrPC except an order of a Magistrate under section 155(2) CrPC.
- Where uncontroverted allegations in the FIR or the complaint and the evidence collected in support do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
- Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence.
- Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
- Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in the CrPC or the concerned Act to the institution of criminal proceedings or where there is a specific provision in the CrPC or concerned Act providing efficacious redress.
- Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide or where a proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and to spite him due to a private and personal grudge.”
Case Laws
State of Haryana v Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604 is a landmark judgment regarding the Quashing of FIR, the Supreme Court held “We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court established some parameters for the quashing by High Courts, some of which are mentioned above.
In the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1 the SC held that “while adjudicating a quashing petition, the HC is duty-bound to undertake a prima facie evaluation of whether the ingredients of the alleged offence have been established in the FIR.” Not misjudging the nature of this power the Supreme Court in its judgment in CBI v Maninder Singh (2016) 1 SCC 389 held that the power under section 482 of CrPC must be used very sparingly and especially in economic offences, merely because the party had settled with the bank cannot be a ground for quashing criminal proceedings.
In its judgment of Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v State of Maharashtra, AIR 2019 SC 327 the Hon’ble SC held this provision as ex debito justitiae, where it is an obligation on the court to provide a remedy as a matter of right but cautiously, it was held “The power has to be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of the rare cases.”
In State of Punjab v. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar (2011) 14 SCC 770, it was held, "The use of the word “process” implies that the proceedings are pending before the subordinate court. When reference is made to the phrase “to secure the ends of justice”, it is in fact concerning the order passed by the subordinate court and it cannot be understood in a general connotation of the phrase. More so, while entertaining such application the proceedings should be pending in the subordinate court.” one of the conditions is that the case is still pending in the subordinate court.
In the Central Bureau of Investigation v. Aryan Singh, 2023 Latest Caselaw 292 SC. It was held by the apex court “The Court is not compelled to hold the mini-trial during the stage of discharge and/or quashing of the criminal proceedings when acting under Section 482 CrPC. The burden of proof for the charges is not yet on the prosecution or the investigating agency. The charges are required to be proved during the trial on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution / investigating agency. It was held that at the stage of discharge and/or while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not.”
Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court made a significant observation that the ground for quashing is that the FIR is the result of personal vengeance so the court must look closely at the facts and circumstances in the FIR, this observation was made while the apex court hearing an appeal against the Allahabad HC order in the case of Salib @ Shalu @ Salim vs State of U P | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 618.
In Mahmood Ali vs State of UP | 2023 Latest Caselaw 616 SC an FIR was lodged against the accused alleging commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 342, 386, 504, 506 IPC. The petition seeking FIR quashing was dismissed by the Allahabad HC, so an appeal was filed in the apex court; the Apex Court said “Even if the entire case of the prosecution is believed or accepted to be true, none of the ingredients to constitute the offence as alleged is disclosed.” After looking into the FIR, it was noted that the particular FIR was lodged after a period of 14 years from the alleged act, there was no specific time or date mentioned about the alleged crime in the FIR.
Conclusion
Section 482 of CrPC is an instrument by which the court ensures that no frivolous or unnecessary complaint would bother the people and that ends of justice are met, it also ensures that the process is not misused for fulfilling one’s ulterior motive and no one is becoming the victim of the procedure. While deciding on such matters, court looks into the gravity of the case and then accordingly decides whether an FIR should be quashed or not.
Picture Source :
