Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhumanna Piraji Narod, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of the first information report (FIR) lodged by respondent No.2, Mangalaji Dharmaji Narod, at Police Station Biloli, District Nanded. The FIR alleged that the petitioner had forged a document. The petitioner contended that the contents of the FIR did not disclose any criminal offence and that the dispute was purely civil in nature, relating to ownership of property. The petitioner argued that even if the document was allegedly forged, it could not be shown that it was used to divest the complainant of ownership. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the FIR did not make out any criminal offence and that the dispute was essentially a civil matter. The court held that continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - FIR quashed where allegations were purely civil in nature and did not disclose any criminal offence - Held that continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR discloses commission of any criminal offence and whether continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR.
Law Points
- FIR quashing
- inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC
- civil dispute not constituting criminal offence
- abuse of process of law
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (08) 4
Criminal Application No. 3609 of 2011
Shri P.R. Katneshwarkar for Applicant, Shri N.R. Shaikh AGP for Respondents
The State of Maharashtra and Mangalaji Dharmaji Narod
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application for quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of FIR lodged by respondent No.2
Filing Reason
Petitioner contended that FIR did not disclose any criminal offence and was an abuse of process
Issues
Whether the FIR discloses commission of any criminal offence?
Whether continuation of proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that contents of FIR do not disclose commission of offence.
Petitioner argued that even if document was forged, it cannot be shown that it was used to divest ownership.
Ratio Decidendi
Where the FIR does not disclose any criminal offence and the dispute is essentially civil in nature, continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law, warranting quashing under Section 482 CrPC.
Judgment Excerpts
In this petition, the petitioner is praying for quashing the first information report lodged by the respondent No.2.
The contents of the first information report do not disclose commission of offence.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Criminal Application No. 3609 of 2011 under Section 482 CrPC before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking quashing of FIR. The court heard both sides and passed judgment on August 18, 2011.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 482
