Case Note & Summary
The judgment arose from a criminal original petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, before the Madras High Court, seeking to quash FIR No.90/2025 registered by Puduchatram Police Station. The FIR alleged that the first accused, Muralikrishnan, had lured several individuals, including the second respondent (defacto complainant), by promising jobs through DMK party headquarters and collected money from them, failing to either secure the jobs or refund the money. The petitioners, being the father (accused No.2) and wife (accused No.3) of the first accused, were also named in the FIR on the allegation that they aided the first accused in the crime. The petitioners contended that there was no material against them and that they were implicated only to exert pressure. They further alleged that prior to the FIR, on 18.02.2025, the defacto complainant trespassed into the house of accused No.2 and forced him to affix his left thumb impression, leading the petitioners to lodge a complaint (CSR No.133/2025) on the same day. Despite this, the FIR was registered against them. The State opposed the petition, arguing that the FIR contained an allegation that the accused Nos.2 and 3 had aided the prime accused, and therefore they were rightly included. The primary legal issue was whether the FIR should be quashed at the nascent stage of investigation when allegations of aiding were made but the petitioners claimed no material connection to the crime. The court, relying on settled law, held that at the investigation stage, the investigating officer cannot go into the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint. It observed that only through investigation would it become clear whether the petitioners actually aided and abetted the first accused. Consequently, the court declined to interdict with the FIR at that preliminary stage and disposed of the petition. The court kept open the liberty of the petitioners to furnish any additional information to the investigating officer and to challenge any final report, if they were prosecuted without sufficient material on record. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Investigation Stage - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 528 - The court declined to quash the FIR at the investigation stage, holding that the investigating officer cannot assess the veracity of allegations at this stage; the question of whether the petitioners aided the prime accused must be determined through investigation. The petitioners were granted liberty to submit information to the investigator and to challenge any final report, if prosecuted without evidence. Held: FIR not quashed; petition disposed of. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR against the petitioners (accused Nos.2 and 3) should be quashed when the allegations of aiding the prime accused are made in the FIR, and whether such allegations can be examined at the stage of investigation
Final Decision
The criminal original petition is disposed of. The court declined to quash the FIR, keeping liberty open to the petitioners to furnish information to the investigating officer and to challenge any final report if prosecuted without material. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- At the stage of investigation
- the investigating officer cannot go into the truth or otherwise of allegations made in the FIR
- investigation is necessary to ascertain whether accused actually aided the prime accused
