Irfan Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 324 MP

                                1
           THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      MCRC-51668-2020
             Irfan Khan Vs. State of MP and another

Gwalior, Dated : 27.02.2021

      Shri Rajnish Sharma, Counsel for the petitioner.

      Smt. Uma Kushwah, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.

1/State.

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for

quashing the FIR in Crime No. 173/2020 registered at Police Station

Mohna, District Gwalior registered for offence under Sections 323,

294, 506 of IPC as well as for quashment of the charge-sheet.

The necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short

are that the complainant Sabir Khan lodged a report on 15.09.2020 on

the allegation that on 14.09.2020 at about 01:00 PM, the applicant

was trying to take away 4 iron rods lying in front of the house of the

complainant. When the complainant objected to it, then the applicant

claimed that iron rods belong to him and on this issue, he gave a

danda blow on his back as well as also assaulted him by fists and

blows. He also used abusing language against the complainant and

also claimed that the shop, which has been let out by the complainant

to Ramesh Dhakad, belongs to the applicant and, therefore, the

complainant must ensure to get the shop vacated, otherwise he would

be killed. It is submitted that in fact, the FIR lodged by the

complainant is by way of counterblast to the FIR lodged by the

applicant. On 15.05.2020 itself the applicant had lodged FIR in Crime

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-51668-2020 Irfan Khan Vs. State of MP and another

No. 174/2020 which was registered at Police Station Mohna, District

Gwalior for offence under Sections 323, 294, 506 of IPC on the

allegation that the complainant was taking away the iron rods lying in

front of the house of the applicant. When the applicant objected to it,

then the complainant claimed that the iron rods belong to him and on

that issue, he gave a danda blow to the applicant and also assaulted

him by fists and blows and also used abusing language and further

threatened that in case, if the shop is not given to the complainant,

then he would be killed.

Challenging the FIR as well as the charge-sheet, it is submitted

by the counsel for the applicant that since the FIR in question is by

way of counterblast to the FIR lodged by the applicant, therefore, the

prosecution of the applicant is because of malafides of the informant

and thus, it is liable to be quashed. To buttress his contention, the

counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment passed by the

Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs.

Bhajan Lal and others reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The applicant has lodged the FIR on 15.09.2020 at 13:40 which

has been registered in Crime No. 174/2020, whereas the complainant

has lodged the FIR on the same day at 11:45 AM which has been

registered in Crime No. 173/2020. In both the FIR, the allegations are

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-51668-2020 Irfan Khan Vs. State of MP and another

same. The FIR lodged by the applicant is subsequent in time. Whether

the FIR lodged by the complainant was by way of counterblast or the

FIR lodged by the applicant is by way of counterblast and whether the

applicant was the aggressor or the complainant was the aggressor are

disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court

while exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court in the case of Renu Kumari

Vs. Sanjay Kumar and others reported in (2008) 12 SCC 346 has

held that when the allegations made in the FIR discloses the

commission of cognizable offence, then the allegation of mala fides

against informant are of no consequence and cannot by themselves be

the basis for quashing the proceedings.

Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered

opinion that no case is made out warranting interference.

The application fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge

Abhi Digitally signed by ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.03.02 11:46:03 +05'30'