Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court set aside an interim order of the Allahabad High Court that restrained the investigating officer from filing the charge-sheet in a criminal case involving allegations of fraud and forgery in the sale of properties belonging to the Spiritual Regeneration Movement Foundation of India, a society associated with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. The appellant, the complainant, challenged the High Court's order passed in a quashment petition filed by respondent No. 2, a director of M/s Singhvahini Infraprojects Private Limited. The background involved multiple FIRs and civil suits concerning the society's freehold lands, which were allegedly sold fraudulently by unauthorized persons using forged documents. The High Court, relying on judgments like Mohd. Imbrahim and Jit Vinayak Arolkar, had stayed arrest and directed that investigation continue but the charge-sheet not be filed, citing the judgment in Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni. The Supreme Court found this approach unjustified, noting that the facts of Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni were different and that the High Court's order effectively stalled the investigation. The Court emphasized that under Article 226, a writ petition can challenge an FIR only until cognizance is taken; thereafter, the remedy is under Section 528 BNSS or Section 482 CrPC. The Court also referred to Neeharika Infrastructure, which held that blanket interim orders restraining investigation are unsustainable. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed the investigating officer to proceed with the investigation and file the charge-sheet in accordance with law, while clarifying that the High Court could still decide the quashment petition on its merits.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashment of FIR - Interim Relief - Scope of Article 226 - The High Court, while entertaining a writ petition for quashing an FIR, cannot pass an interim order restraining the investigating agency from filing the charge-sheet, as it affects the statutory right of investigation. The power under Article 226 is available only until cognizance is taken; thereafter, the remedy lies under Section 528 BNSS or Section 482 CrPC. (Paras 11-15) B) Criminal Procedure - Investigation - Filing of Charge-Sheet - Neeharika Infrastructure Principles - The Supreme Court in Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra held that a blanket interim order directing 'no coercive steps' or restraining filing of charge-sheet is unsustainable as it hampers investigation. Such orders must be reasoned and not affect the investigating agency's statutory duties. (Para 14) C) Criminal Procedure - Quashment - Civil Dispute - Criminality - The High Court's reliance on Mohd. Imbrahim and Jit Vinayak Arolkar to quash FIR on the ground of civil dispute is misplaced where repeated fraudulent sales of property are alleged. The existence of a civil dispute does not automatically negate criminality, especially when multiple FIRs and litigations are pending. (Paras 11-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in passing an interim order restraining the investigating officer from filing the charge-sheet under Section 193(3) BNSS while the quashment petition was pending.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned interim order dated 06.02.2026 of the High Court, and directed the investigating officer to proceed with the investigation and file the charge-sheet in accordance with law. The High Court was left free to decide the quashment petition on its own merits.
Law Points
- Interim relief in quashment petitions
- Scope of Article 226
- Filing of charge-sheet
- Neeharika Infrastructure principles
- Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni distinction
