Case Note & Summary
The applicant-accused, Ravi Hamirbhai Bharai, filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, before the Gujarat High Court seeking quashing of FIR No. 11203012220328 of 2022 registered at Chorwad Police Station, District Junagadh, for offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 65(a), 65(e), 98(2), 81, 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, as well as the consequent Criminal Case No. 92 of 2024 pending before the learned JMFC at Maliya Hatina, District Junagadh. The applicant contended that the FIR was palpably false, with no evidence to implicate him, and that the complainant had made only general allegations without attributing any specific role to him. The applicant's name was disclosed from the statement of a co-accused who was found in conscious possession of the contraband. The learned advocate for the applicant argued that the statement of a co-accused cannot be treated as substantive evidence against the applicant. The learned APP for the State opposed the application. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the FIR lacked specific allegations against the applicant and that his name was revealed only from the co-accused's statement. The court held that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of process of law and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Inherent Powers - Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - The court considered whether an FIR can be quashed when the allegations are general and no specific role is attributed to the accused. The court held that where the FIR lacks specific allegations and the accused's name is revealed only from the statement of a co-accused without independent evidence, the proceedings are liable to be quashed to prevent abuse of process. (Paras 1-6) B) Evidence - Statement of Co-accused - Not Substantive Evidence - The court noted that the name of the applicant-accused was disclosed from the statement of co-accused, which cannot be treated as substantive evidence against the applicant. (Para 4) C) Prohibition Act - Offences under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 98(2), 81, 83 - Forgery under IPC Sections 465, 468, 471 - The FIR alleged offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and IPC, but the court found no specific role attributed to the applicant-accused and quashed the proceedings. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings against the applicant-accused should be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, when the allegations are general and no specific role is attributed.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and quashed the FIR being C.R. No. 11203012220328 of 2022 registered with Chorwad Police Station, District Junagadh, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 98(2), 81, 83 of the Prohibition Act, as well as the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 92 of 2024 pending before the learned JMFC at Maliya Hatina, District Junagadh, and all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto. Rule made absolute.
Law Points
- Inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS
- Quashing of FIR
- No specific role attributed
- General allegations insufficient
- Statement of co-accused not substantive evidence
