Allegations requiring factual investigation do not warrant quashing the FIR at this stage.

Respondent No. 2 alleged that she transferred money to the petitioner after he promised to marry her and that he had induced her to part with the money with an intention to cheat her.

She also alleged that a gold ring went missing from her residence while she was away and that the petitioner had access to the house; his presence was said to have been captured on CCTV.

The petitioner contended that the parties’ relationship had soured, that he had repaid more than he received, and that the complaint was intended to pressure and harass him.

He sought to quash the FIR registered in Crime No. 62/2026 for alleged offences under Sections 318(4) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

1. Whether the allegations concerning the money transfers and the petitioner’s alleged intention and inducement required investigation into the alleged offence under Section 318(4) BNS.

2. Whether the allegation that the petitioner had access to the complainant’s house when her gold ring went missing required investigation into the alleged theft.

3. Whether the FIR should be quashed in the circumstances presented.

The petition invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, stated in the petition heading as filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of the FIR.

The FIR alleged offences under Sections 318(4) and 305 BNS.

The Court did not cite any precedent or set out a separate legal test for quashing; it held that the disputed questions about the alleged inducement, intention to cheat, repayment, and theft required investigation.

The Court considered the parties’ competing accounts but found that the available material showed an acquaintance and an allegation that the complainant transferred money following a promise of marriage.

Whether the petitioner intended to cheat when the money was transferred, intended to repay it, or had in fact repaid money to the complainant could not be resolved at this stage and required investigation.

The Court likewise considered the allegation that the petitioner had access to the house and that his presence might have been captured by CCTV sufficient for the theft allegation to be investigated.

It directed the petitioner to provide the Investigating Officer with documents concerning repayment and communications between the parties, to be considered objectively.

It directed the petitioner to provide the relevant repayment documents and communications to the Investigating Officer, who was to consider them objectively and file an appropriate report; the theft allegation was also to be investigated and an appropriate report filed.