The Court, under section 482 of Cr Pc, would investigate whether the allegations in the case include the requisite elements of a crime. If the face value of the allegations doesn’t amount to the charge, the charges can be overturned. This auspicious judgment was passed by The High Court of Bombay in the case of Amol S/o Marotirao Talwadkar vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors [Criminal Application No. 569 of 2019] by Honourable Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge & Justice B.U. Debadwar.
The facts of the case Respondent along with two other members of flying squad noticed one trailer proceeding towards Bidar, trailer driver was asked to show R.T.O. papers, which they didn’t showed and diverted the trailer toward bus stop and applicant arrived there, called upon the respondent to leave the trailer without taking any action or registering any crime under the provisions of M.V. Act. Since the applicant had prevented and used criminal force to deter the respondent. They were charged with section 353 or 504 and 506 of the IPC.
The learned counsel for the applicant, vehemently argued that the allegations made in the FIR are false, baseless and an afterthought, they do not disclose a cognizable offence justifying an investigation by the competent Police Officer. The applicant had not at all, either prevented or deterred the respondent and his associates from discharging their lawful duty. The allegations in FIR are not at all sufficient to make out a case, either under section 353 or 504 and 506 of the IPC. Therefore, it would not be proper and legal to drag the applicant to face the prosecution, he furthered added.
The Learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that in the relevant period, the respondent, along with his staff, was discharging his lawful duty. The averments made in the FIR are clear, cogent and sufficient to make out a prima facie case under section 353 of the IPC.
The court relied on the apex court in the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy and anr Vs. Sudha Seetharam and anr, “it was held that The High Court, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is required to examine whether the averments in the complaint constitute the ingredients necessary for an offence alleged under the Penal Code. If the averments taken on their face do not constitute the ingredients necessary for the offence, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 482. A criminal proceeding can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint do not disclose the commission of an offence under the Penal Code”
The court after examining opined that the “FIR in its entirety, we are satisfied that the averments made therein constitute ingredients necessary for an offence under sections 353 and 506 of the IPC. For the reasons discussed herein above, the FIR cannot be quashed. With this, we dismiss the application”