Writ Jurisidiction Under Article 226 Can Be Invoked To Quash Fir: SC

OVERVIEW 

The Supreme Court recently ruled that a High Court can quash an FIR if it is found to be an abuse of the process of law, as per the powers vested by Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the case in question, a writ petition was filed by the accused to quash the first information report registered under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, which was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. 

The accused claimed that the FIR filed against him is ‘a counterblast to the cheque bounce complaint filed against the complainant.’

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 

The division bench comprising Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice M.R. Shah noted that the fundamental behind section 482 CrPC and/or Article 226 of the Constitution is for the advantageous purpose of not allowing criminal proceedings to be used as a weapon of harassment. 

The Court cited the case of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) stating that section 482 of the CrPC sustains the inherent power to the High Court to pronounce orders to precent abuse of process in any Court or to secure the ends of justice, same as the powers held under Article 226 of the Constitution.

“As held by this Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, section 482 CrPC is prefaced with an overriding provision. The statute saves the inherent power of the High Court, as a superior court, to make such orders as are necessary (i) to prevent an abuse of the process of any Court, or (ii) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Same are the powers with the High Court, when it exercises the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.”

The accused further contended that since the application was filed under section 156 (3) of CrPC, which is pending before the Magistrate, the impugned FIR with the same allegations would not be maintainable.

However, the bench rejected the contention stating that the Code of Criminal Procedure allows the eventuality of a complaint case and enquiry, or trial by the Magistrate and an investigation by the police in-charge of the FIR.

“…if the police report does not relate to any accused in the complaint case or if the Magistrate does not take cognisance of any offence on the police report, he shall proceed with the inquiry or trial, which was stayed by him, in accordance with the provisions of CrPC. Thus, merely because on the same set of facts with the same allegations and averments earlier the complaint is filed, there is no bar to lodge the FIR with the police station with the same allegations and averments.”

CONCLUSION 

The Court, thus upholding the principle of the provision, ruled that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 can be invoked by High Courts to quash FIRs if it is found to be filed for the purpose of harassment.

WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS REGARDING THE RULING GIVEN BY THE SUPREME COURT? LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS BELOW!