Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 482 – Abuse of process of law – Subsequent FIR in Udaipur, Rajasthan on the same set of allegations by the complainant after two weeks of lodging the first FIR under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC in Hisar, Haryana was an abuse of process of law. Held: The inaction of the complainant in withdrawing the first complaint or allowing the investigating agency in Hisar to continue its investigation without taking steps to transfer the first complaint to Udaipur on the ground of commission of offence in Udaipur i.e., where the second FIR was filed constitutes an abuse of process of law. [Paras 7, 11]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 482 – Non-application of mind by High Court – Findings of the High Court contradictory to the record and admitted facts.
Held: The record clearly shows that the subsequent complaint lodged at Udaipur contained the same allegations as in the first FIR at Hisar and additionally it was stated therein about the earlier complaint lodged at Hisar – Thus, the High Court erred in dismissing the quashing petition of the Appellant on the ground that the complaint in Udaipur was prior in point of time than the complaint in Hisar and the Rajasthan Police was unaware of the earlier proceedings. [Paras 7-12]
Abuse of Process of Law – Misuse of State machinery for ulterior motives – The complainants’ conduct of neither appearing before the trial court at Hisar nor withdrawing their complaint shows their intention to harass the appellant. Held: The Court noticed that the Respondent No. 3 wife as a gazetted police officer at the relevant time and being well aware of the laws, in particular, CrPC, misused her position for filing one complaint after the other through her father (complainant) – Further, the conduct of the Complainant and Respondent wife of neither appearing before the Trial Court at Hisar nor withdrawing the complaint shows their intention to harass the Appellant by first making him face a trial in Hisar, which ultimately acquitted the Appellant, and then again at Udaipur – Accordingly, impugned FIR quashed with costs. [Paras 4, 11]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.