Full Judgment Text
1
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.393 OF 2021
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION [CRL] NO. 3705 OF 2015]
RAM KISHAN …..APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ……RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed challenging the Order of the
Rajasthan High Court whereby the First Information Report (for
short ‘FIR’) No.217 of 2006 lodged by the appellant against the
respondent no.3 under Sections 332 and 353 of the Indian Penal
Code (for short ‘IPC’), has been quashed in a petition under Section
482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) filed by the
respondents no. 2 and 3.
2
3. Briefly stated, the facts of this case are that the appellant, who
is a Police Constable, along with a Sub Inspector of Police and
another Constable, were checking the vehicles passing by on the
road in the evening on 21.07.2006, when at about 09:15 pm, one
motorcycle was stopped, and when the rider (Deepak Gupta) was
asked about the papers of the vehicle, instead of showing the
papers, on the pretext of talking over mobile phone, he fled away
and returned after about 20 minutes along with two ladies in one
Maruti Car, one of whom was the respondent no.3Ms. Ratna Gupta
and the other was respondent no.2Ms. Usha Gupta. The said Ms.
Ratna Gupta, who was herself an Inspector in Rajasthan Police,
alighted from the car and uttered caste related abuses to the
appellant, and asked that what power did the appellant have to stop
the motorcycle despite her (Ratna Gupta’s) name having been
taken. She then caught hold of the collar of the appellant, slapped
and beat him, and thereafter fled away from the place. An FIR
No.217 of 2006 of the said incident was lodged by the appellant on
21.07.2006 at 09:45 pm.
3
4. Cross FIR No. 218 of 2006 was lodged on 22.07.2006 by
Deepak Gupta alleging that he was stopped by the appellant in the
late evening on 21.07.2006, and that the appellant asked for
Rs.100/ (Rupees One Hundred) and when the same was not given,
the appellant assaulted the said Deepak Gupta. It was also alleged
that the appellant behaved indecently with the respondent no.2 Ms.
Usha Gupta (who was also with him on motorcycle) and tore her
clothes.
5. With regard to FIR No.218 of 2006, after a detailed
investigation, a Final Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed by
the Police on 30.12.2006, which matter is pending before the
concerned Magistrate.
6. The earlier FIR No. 217 of 2006 was challenged by the
respondents no. 2 and 3 before the Rajasthan High Court, which
petition has been allowed and the said FIR has been quashed.
Challenging the said Order dated 23.01.2015 of the High Court,
this Special Leave Petition has been filed.
4
7. Shri Rishi Matoliya, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf
of the appellant and Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned Senior Advocate
has appeared for the Staterespondent no.1. Respondents no.2 and
3 (Ms. Usha Gupta and Ms. Ratna Gupta) appeared in person. By
an earlier Order dated 24.07.2018, this Court had recorded that the
respondent no.3 (who appeared in person) was not in a position to
make her submissions properly and therefore, Shri Vijay Hansaria,
learned Senior Advocate was appointed as Amicus Curiae.
8. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties as well as
Amicus Curiae and Respondents no.2 and 3, at length and have
carefully perused the relevant documents.
9. From the record, as well as the submission made by the
learned Counsel for the parties and also the Amicus Curiae, we are
of the opinion that in the facts of the present case, the finding
recorded by the High Court that the report (FIR no. 218) of the
respondents no.2 and 3 (petitioners before the High Court) was not
registered immediately, cannot be justified, primarily because the
matter relating to FIR No.217 of 2006 was under investigation and
it was not for the High Court to have substituted its own opinion in
5
this regard by holding that the FIR no. 217 of 2006 was filed as a
counter blast, specially when it was registered a day earlier than
FIR no. 218 of 2006 and the matter was admittedly still under
investigation. In our considered opinion, quashing the FIR No.217
of 2006, solely on this ground is wholly unreasonable and cannot
be justified in law. It is also noteworthy, that while deciding the
matter, the High Court has not considered the Injury Report of the
appellantRam Kishan dated 22.07.2006, which was submitted by
the Medical Officer of the Medical and Health Department of the
Government of Rajasthan, nor have the submissions advanced on
behalf of the appellant (though recorded) been considered in the
Order quashing the FIR no. 217 of 2006.
10. Considering the fact that the matter relating to FIR No. 217 of
2006 was under investigation and merely on the assumption that
the FIR of Deepak Gupta (wrongly mentioned as that of the
respondents no.2 and 3) was not registered immediately and also
keeping in view the Final Report submitted in the FIR No.218 of
2006 was not taken into consideration by the Rajasthan High
Court, we are of the opinion that the Rajasthan High Court has
erred in quashing the FIR No.217 of 2006.
6
11. Accordingly, we set aside the Order dated 23.01.2015 passed
by the Rajasthan High Court in SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.1144
of 2008 (Usha Gupta & anr vs State of Rajasthan & anr.) and direct
that the police shall submit its report under section 173 Cr.P.C.
after carrying out a complete and proper investigation relating to
FIR No.217 of 2006. Since, the matter has been pending for about
a decade and a half, we direct that the investigation be concluded
as expeditiously as possible.
With the aforesaid observations, this appeal stands allowed.
……………………………..CJI.
[S.A. BOBDE]
……………………………..J.
[L. NAGESWARA RAO]
……………………………..J.
[VINEET SARAN]
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 09, 2021.