Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2007 DAILYLAW 2308 (DEL)

AISHWARYA DEV CHAND KATOCH v. STATE

2007-09-17

Shiv Narayan Dhingra

body2007
( 1 ) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr. P. C is preferred by the petitioner for quashing the fir No. 132 of 2002 registered at Police Station Mehrauli, under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of IPC. ( 2 ) QUASHING of the instant FIR is sought by the petitioner on the ground that no offence under Sections 420,467/468/120-B IPC was made out against the petitioner even if the allegations made in the FIR, are accepted as true. The other ground is that the allegations were so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can reach a conclusion that offences have been committed. ( 3 ) THE present FIR was lodged against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had fabricated and forged a Will of Maharani Kamllenduwati Shah and on the basis of forged and fabricated Will, the petitioner applied for mutation of the land in her name. During pendency of the instant writ petition, the investigation was completed and chargesheet has been filed. The police after investigation had come to a conclusion that there was enough material to proceed against the petitioner and others. ( 4 ) I consider that powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as well as under Section 482 Cr. P. C for quashing an FIR has to be exercised by this Court sparingly and carefully and in rarest of rare cases in order to prevent abuse of process of law and this power cannot be exercised to stifle the legitimate prosecution. Once charge sheet has been filed, this Court cannot act as a trial court ans sift through the evidence to find out as to whether a case was made out against the petitioner or not. The petitioner can raise arguments about the charge having not been made out before the trial court and not before this Court. Counsel for the petitioner submits that since charge sheet was filed after filing of the instant petition, this Court can still exercise power under section 482 Cr. P. C and can quash the FIR. I consider that this arguments of the counsel for the petitioner must fail. If this Court had considered on filing of the petition that the FIR did not disclose commission of any offence, this Court would have stayed the investigation. P. C and can quash the FIR. I consider that this arguments of the counsel for the petitioner must fail. If this Court had considered on filing of the petition that the FIR did not disclose commission of any offence, this Court would have stayed the investigation. The very fact that this Court did not stay the investigation indicates that this Court considered that there was sufficient reason for investigation to continue. Since the investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed, I considered that it is not appropriate for this court to exercise powers under Section 482 Cr. P. C and quash the instant FIR. The writ petition is hereby dismissed. No orders as to costs. .