Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2020 (11) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 994 - SC - Indian LawsRefusal of the Allahabad High Court to quash the FIR - Power of police to investigate an issue, the substratum of which is sub judice before this Court in the civil appeals - long delay in lodging the complaint - purchase of 3 vehicles by respondent as against his claim to have purchased 7 vehicles - HELD THAT:- The question whether the 3rd Respondent-complainant purchased 3 vehicles as revealed by the VAHAN Portal of the Government or 7 vehicles as claimed by him in his complaint, is a question of fact which has to be established only in the course of investigation/trial. In a petition for quashing the FIR, the Court cannot go into disputed questions of fact. Delay in lodging complaint - HELD THAT:- The mere delay on the part of the 3rd Respondent-complainant in lodging the complaint, cannot by itself be a ground to quash the FIR. The law is too well settled on this aspect to warrant any reference to precedents. Therefore, the second ground on which the Petitioner seeks to quash the FIR cannot be countenanced. Effect of pendency of the Civil Appeals arising out of the order of the NGT and the interim order passed by this Court in the Civil Appeals for quashing of FIR - HELD THAT:-The applicants before the NGT did not seek any relief for themselves, as purchasers of vehicles. The reliefs sought by the applicants before the NGT were broad and general. This is why the NGT, by its final order dated 07.03.2019 directed only the CPCB to consider the initiation of prosecution in the light of the applicable statutory regime, while ordering the manufacturers to deposit ₹ 500 crores as compensation for the damage caused to the environment - the order of the NGT, passed on the applications filed by certain individuals not claiming as purchasers of vehicles, cannot be taken as an impediment for an individual who purchased cars from the manufacturers, to lodge a complaint, if he has actually suffered on account of any representation made by the manufacturers. The proceedings before the NGT were not intended to address issues relating to individuals, such as (i) whether any emissions manipulation software, called in common parlance as 'defeat devices' were installed in the vehicles purchased by certain individuals; and (ii) whether any representation was made to the purchasers of the cars in which such devices had been installed, about the emission efficiency level of the cars - we are unable to agree with the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner that the substratum of the police complaint is something that is already the subject matter of adjudication before this Court in the appeals arising out of the order of the NGT. As a matter of fact, the High Court has been fair to the Petitioner, by granting protection against arrest till the filing of the report Under Section 173(2) of the Code. We do not think that the Petitioner can ask for anything more. The SLP dismissed.
|