Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THIRUKKURAL PERUMAL
DATE OF JUDGMENT31/01/1995
BENCH:
ANAND, A.S. (J)
BENCH:
ANAND, A.S. (J)
FAIZAN UDDIN (J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC (2) 449 JT 1995 (3) 166
1995 SCALE (1)423
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of an order made by a learned
Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras on
9th November, 1993, in Criminal Original Petition
No.8730/92, Crl. M.P.No.4794/92 and Crl.M.P. 6765/92. The
learned Judge quashed the First Information Report, Crime
No. 246/92 of P.S. Tallakulam, in so far as the respondent
to concerned as also the criminal proceedings emanating
therefrom against him.
3. We have gone through the order of the learned Single
Judge and heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. M.S.K.Shanmugovol Chettiyar lodged a first information
report at P.S. Tallakulam against the respondents alleging
commission of offences under Section 147/148/342/323/395/500
(ii) and 109 IPC. Investigation was taken in hand and some
evidence was collected by the investigating agency. The
respondent filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the
High Court and by the impugned order the petition was
allowed and the proceedings emanating from crime case 246/92
(supra) were quashed. From a bare perusal of the order of
the learned single Judge it appears that while quashing the
proceedings reliance, has been placed upon some evidence
collected by the investigating agency during the
investigation. The approach of the learned Judge in relying
upon such evidence, which is yet to be produced before the
trial court, to quash the criminal proceedings in crime
cases No.246/92 (supra) was not proper. The power of
quashing a FIR and criminal proceedings should be exercised
sparingly by the Courts. Indeed, the High Court has the
extra-ordinary or inherent power to reach out injustice and
quash the First Information Report and criminal proceedings,
keeping in view the guidelines laid down by this Court in
various judgments (reference in this connection may be made
with advantage to State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal &
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
Ors. (1992 Supp. (1) 335) but the same has to be done with
circumspection. The normal process of the criminal trial
cannot be cut short in a rather casual manner. The Court,
is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the
reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the
FIR of the complaint on the basis of the evidence collected
during investigation only while dealing with a petition
under Section 432 Cr.P.C. seeking the quashing of the FIR
and the criminal proceedings. The learned single Judge
apparently fell into an error in evaluating the genuineness
and, reliability of the allegations made in the FIR on the
basis of the evidence collected during the investigation.
The order of the learned single Judge cannot, therefore, be
sustained. This appeal succeeds and is allowed. The
impugned order of the High Court is hereby set aside.
5. We clarify that nothing said hereinabove or by the
learned single Judge of the High Court in the impugned
judgment shall be constructed as any expression of opinion
on the merits of the case, expressly or impliedly, and the
trial court shall deal with
168
the case uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the
High Court or by this Court.
170