In, Vijay Kumar vs State of Karnataka, a Single Bench of Karnataka HC has held that, Quashment of criminal proceedings is a serious matter and the same having been left to the wisdom of Investigating Agency. Therefore, Court exercising a limited jurisdiction u/s.482 of Cr.P.c. cannot undertake a roving enquiry in the matter.
Facts
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.c, praying to quash the FIR registered for the offence punishable under Section 504, 506, 406 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Petitioner seeks a direction to the jurisdictional police to undertake and accomplish investigation in respect of his F.I.R. whereby, the petitioners seeks quashment of the said proceedings. This is opposed by the petitioner in the writ petition who has lodged the F.I.R., contending that criminal proceedings should not ordinarily be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.
Contention Made
Petitioner: That an F.I.R. of the kind cannot be kept in a limbo indefinitely, especially in the light of Apex Court decision in Lalitha Kumari vs State of U.P.(2014) 2 SCC 1. 2. Crl.P.No.3163/2021 and both filed u/s.482 of Cr.P.c. 1973, seek quashment of the criminal proceedings on the ground that there is no prima facie case to undertake investigation and that criminal law cannot be set in motion casually as held by the Apex Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd vs Special Judicial Magistrate, 1998 SC 120. So contending learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks quashment of the said proceedings.
Respondent: That the petitioners have already secured an advance bail against their apprehension and that the bail orders stipulate his co-operation in the investigation process.
Court Observation
A Single Bench of Karnataka HC while dealing with the question of “Quashment of Criminal Proceedings”, observed that, Quashment of criminal proceedings is a serious matter.
That an F.I.R. is a skeletal instrument that sets the criminal law in motion and that this court need not bother about the bone, blood & flesh of such an instrument, the same having been left to the wisdom of Investigating Agency.
Therefore, this Court exercising a limited jurisdiction u/s.482 of Cr.P.c. cannot undertake a roving enquiry in the matter.
Court Judgment
Karnataka HC while dismissing both the appeal has held that, a direction issues to the jurisdictional police to undertake & accomplish the investigation within an outer limit of four weeks and report compliance to the Registrar General of this court within next one week,
Case: Vijay Kumar vs State of Karnataka
Citation: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3163 OF 2021 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4322 OF 2021
Bench: Mr Justice Krishna S. Dixit
Decided on: 1st September, 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
