FIR quashable where accused is named solely on co-accused's statement without corroborating incriminating evidence.

The applicant sought to quash FIR No. 11203012220328/2022 lodged at Chorwad Police Station and the subsequent Criminal Case No. 244 of 2025

The applicant was accused of offenses under Sections 465, 468, and 471 of the IPC and various sections of the Gujarat Prohibition Act

The applicant was not found in possession of the prohibited liquor nor was he the owner of the vehicle used; his name was revealed solely through the statements of co-accused persons

A charge-sheet was filed on March 13, 2025, based on these statements

1. Whether the criminal proceedings against the applicant should be quashed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) when the only evidence is the statement of a co-accused

2. Whether the continuation of the trial would amount to an abuse of the process of law in the absence of independent incriminating evidence

The court applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (formerly Section 482 CrPC), regarding the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of law

It considered Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, noting that while a co-accused's statement is relevant for the purpose of investigation to provide clues or information, it requires corroborative reliable evidence to sustain a prosecution

The Court perused the original investigation papers and charge-sheet, noting that despite the conclusion of the investigation, there was no incriminating material linking the applicant to the crime other than the statements of co-accused

The Court observed that the applicant was not found in conscious possession of the liquor, had no ownership of the vehicle, and the prosecution failed to provide call records or other evidence showing contact between the applicant and the co-accused

While acknowledging that Section 10 of the Evidence Act allows co-accused statements to be used as a "clue" during investigation, the Court held that since the investigation ends without finding any supportive material, such statements alone are insufficient for trial

Furthermore, the Court noted that the FIR against a similarly situated co-accused (Ravi Hamirbhai Bharai) had already been quashed

The Court ordered the quashing and setting aside of FIR No. 11203012220328/2022 and all consequential proceedings in Criminal Case No. 244 of 2025 qua the present applicant. Rule was made absolute