TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oof. At this stage, the High Court could not appreciate the evidence nor could draw its own inferences from the contents of the FIR and the material relied on. It was more so when the material relied on was disputed by the Complainants and vice-versa. In such a situation, it becomes the job of the investigating authority at such stage to probe and then of the Court to examine the questions once the charge sheet is filed along with such material as to how far and to what extent reliance can be placed on such material - once the Court finds that the FIR does disclose prima facie commission of any cognizable offence, it should stay its hand and allow the investigating machinery to step in to initiate the probe to unearth the crime in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Code. Though learned senior Counsel appearing for the parties argued the issues touching the merits of the case by referring to hundreds of documents but, in our view, it is wholly unnecessary to enter into the factual arena once we record a finding that a prima facie case is made out on reading the FIR including the documents enclosed therein - the appeals filed by the complainants are allowed. - CR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he members of one Rathore family, who according to them, belonged to Halpai caste. 6. Six members of the Rathore Family (hereinafter referred to as the Complainants) filed one joint complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Surat on 25.04.2011 (Annexure-P-2) complaining therein that one person by name-Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel in conspiracy with several other named persons jointly defrauded and deceived the complainants by taking advantage of their illiteracy, poverty and unawareness got executed bogus Power of Attorney with bogus signatures in relation to the disputed land. It was alleged that these persons again in furtherance with the conspiracy got the disputed land transferred in favour of several persons and illegally got the construction maps sanctioned to enable them to do construction over the disputed land. 7. In short and in substance, the grievance of the complainants was that the above named persons conspired together and snatched away from the complainants their aforementioned valuable land by committing fraud, cheating, deception, breach of trust etc. on them. 8. The complainants enclosed all disputed documents along with their complaint to show prima facie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the High Court partly allowed the criminal applications and passed the following operative portion of the judgment contained in Para 88 which reads as under: (1) The First Information Report, so far as the offence punishable Under Sections 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and the Atrocities Act is concerned, is quashed. The investigation as regards the allegations of creating the two bogus power of attorneys and erasing of 73AA is concerned, shall be completed by the Commissioner of Police, Surat in accordance with law. (2) The Commissioner is also directed to undertake the investigation as regards the persons, who had approached the land owners and had obtained the thumb impressions on the complaints addressed to the Commissioner of Police, Surat. To put it in other words, I direct the Commissioner to undertake proper investigation as regards the allegations of blackmailing and extortion leveled against the particular persons. 15. It is against this judgment, both parties, i.e., the complainants and the Accused persons have felt aggrieved and filed these appeals. 16. So far as the Accused persons are concerned, they have challenged that part of the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel Mr. Dushyant Dave and Harin P. Rawal appearing for the complainants urged that the High Court should have dismissed the criminal applications filed by the Accused persons and upheld the entire FIR as a whole for being probed as, according to them, the FIR did disclose prima facie cognizable offences against the Accused persons named therein. It was urged that keeping in view the nature of the offences, the law of limitation does not apply as has been held by this Court in number of similar cases. 23. Learned Counsel further urged that there was no justification much less legal justification on the part of the High Court to have quashed the FIR in part and hence the judgment to that extent deserves to be set aside. 24. It is this submission, which was elaborated by the learned senior Counsel by placing reliance on several documents filed by them including placing reliance on the observations of the High Court in the earlier round of litigation and the impugned judgment and at the same time also denied the documents filed by the Accused persons including their contents and correctness. 25. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length and on perusal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in question is bad in law because it does not disclose any cognizable offence against any of the Accused persons whereas only a part of the FIR is good which discloses a prima facie case against the Accused persons and hence it needs further investigation to that extent in accordance with law. 29. In doing so, the High Court, in our view, virtually decided all the issues arising out of the case like an investigating authority or/and appellate authority decides, by little realizing that it was exercising its inherent jurisdiction Under Section 482 of the Code at this stage. 30. The High Court, in our view, failed to see the extent of its jurisdiction, which it possesses to exercise while examining the legality of any FIR complaining commission of several cognizable offences by Accused persons. In order to examine as to whether the factual contents of the FIR disclose any prima facie cognizable offences or not, the High Court cannot act like an investigating agency and nor can exercise the powers like an appellate Court. The question, in our opinion, was required to be examined keeping in view the contents of the FIR and prima facie material, if any, requiring no proof. 31. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tinguishable on facts, whereas the decision on which we have placed reliance is more on the point. It is for the reason that in the first place, the 2 decisions relied on by the learned Counsel for the Accused persons were the cases where a complaint was filed in the Court Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and in other case under some Sections of Indian Penal Code. It is this complaint which was sought to be quashed by invoking the inherent jurisdiction Under Section 482 of the Code. Such is not the case here. Secondly, the decision therefore turned on the facts involved in respective cases. 37. In the case at hand, the challenge is especially to registration of the FIR. This Court in Swapan Kumar Guha (supra) case examined the exercise of inherent powers of the High Court in the context of a challenge to an FIR. In our view, therefore, the law laid down in Swapan Kumar Guha (supra) is directly applicable to the facts of this case as against the law laid down in the two cited decisions. 38. In the light of foregoing discussion, it is now necessary that the matter, which is subject matter of FIR in question, needs to be investigated in detail by the investiga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
