Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 254 (HP)

Sheela Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2023-05-10

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2023
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR No.140 of 2021, dated 06.09.2021, registered under Sections 325, 447, 504, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., on the ground that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the said case at the behest of the private respondent, who happens to be the complainant. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioners and the FIR in fact has been lodged just to cause harassment to the petitioners and the same is evident from the fact that there was seven days delay even in lodging of the FIR. Learned counsel further submitted that even the perusal of the final investigation report would demonstrate that no offence as alleged to have been committed by the petitioners is in fact made out and therefore, it would be in the interest of justice in case present petition is allowed by quashing the FIR. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General, who is appearing for respondents No.1 to 3, has submitted that the present petition is nothing, but an abuse of the process of law, for the reason that as now the final report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code stands filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Indora, District Kangra, H.P., it is for the said Court to take cognizance of the same and take a call as to whether any offences as alleged to have been committed by the petitioners are made out or not and merit of the FIR or Final Investigation Report be not gone into by this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned Additional Advocate General, this Court is of the considered view that the objection raised by the State is worthy of merit. 5. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned Additional Advocate General, this Court is of the considered view that the objection raised by the State is worthy of merit. 5. It is a matter of record that an FIR has been lodged against the petitioners and after the completion of the investigation, now the final report stands submitted to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Indora, District Kangra, H.P. Therefore, it is for the said Court to go into the final report, filed under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and take a call as to whether the petitioners are to be discharged or they should be made to face the trial. The petitioners have a right to make their submissions at the stage of framing of charges and this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, cannot be called upon to act as the Court of Judicial Magistrate and scrutinize the final report submitted under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and then decide as to whether the petitioners be discharged or they should be made to face the trial. 6. Accordingly, in view of above discussion, as the present petition is not worthy of issuance of notice, the same is dismissed in limine. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.