Supreme Court of India· 02 January 2025

What is the significance, for quashing under Article 226 of the Constitution, of an FIR whose own recitals ask the police to help the complainant recover an amount?

Kim Wansoo v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

2025 INSC 8 · Criminal Appeal (@ SLP (Crl.) No.4849 of 2020)
Coram: C.T. Ravikumar; Sanjay Kumar

🔖 Save this judgment 🔔 Follow Art.226 Constitution of India 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

On a microscopic examination of such an FIR, where apart from vague allegations no specific allegation is made against a particular accused or the company in which he served, and the default in payment is alleged against different companies, the FIR does not make out a case against that accused and the High Court errs in refusing to quash it qua him.

Headnote

Constitution of India — Art.226 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.482 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.406, 420, 120-B — Quashing of FIR — Investigation stage — Vague allegations — Abuse of process of law — Constitution of India — Art.226 — Quashing of FIR not confined to s.482 — Held: Quashing of criminal proceedings is normally sought in exercise of the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C. That does not mean it cannot be done in invocation of the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution. (¶6) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.482 — Interference at the investigation stage — Held further: The High Court may interfere with an investigation where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice, and may quash an FIR which discloses no offence without anything being added to or subtracted from its recitals. (¶8, 9) Constitution of India — Art.226 — Material beyond the averments in the FIR — Held further: The Court is not confined to the averments in the FIR when ascertaining whether the ingredients of the alleged offence are disclosed. It owes a duty to look into the other attending circumstances emerging from the record and to read in between the lines. (¶11) Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.406, 420, 120-B — Vague allegations — Abuse of process — Held further: Where, besides vague allegations, the recitals even if taken as true disclose no offence against an accused, asking him to stand the trial is an abuse of process of law. FIR and further proceedings quashed qua the appellant; appeal allowed. (¶13, 14)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 10We have already extracted the relevant recitals in the subject FIR. Despite our microscopic examination of the allegations raised thereunder, except some vague allegations, no specific allegation could be seen made against the appellant herein or against the company by name ‘HEC India LLP’ wherein he was the Project Manager. That apart, a scanning of the subject FIR would reveal that after making some allegations, the complainant viz., the 4th respondent herein sought for registration of a case against the persons named therein, including the appellant herein to help the complainant/appellant herein to recover the amount mentioned therein. In this context, it is to be seen that the allegations therein would reveal that the complaint of committing default in payment of an amount around Rs.9 Crores was not made against the appellant herein or against the company in which he was the Project Manager, whereas it was made against a different company/different companies.

Paragraph 12On judging the case on hand with reference to the allegations extracted hereinbefore, in the light of the decisions referred supra, we have absolutely no hesitation to hold that the High Court clearly erred in refusing to exercise the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the subject FIR No.64/2020 and all further proceedings in pursuance thereof, qua the appellant.

Acts & Sections

Art.226 Constitution of Indias.482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.406 Indian Penal Code, 1860s.420 Indian Penal Code, 1860s.120-B Indian Penal Code, 1860s.91 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.173(2) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Kim Wansoo v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

Under the Constitution of India, may a High Court quash an FIR in exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226, or is quashing confined to the inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?In what categories of cases may a High Court exercise the power under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash criminal proceedings?May a High Court interfere with a criminal investigation before the police report is submitted under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?When may an FIR itself be quashed on the ground that it discloses no offence?When deciding a petition to quash under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or Article 226 of the Constitution, is the Court confined to the averments made in the FIR or complaint?When does requiring an accused to stand trial on such an FIR amount to an abuse of process of law?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections