LexRESHMA BANO versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 3 S.C.R. 778
"("
~
A
RESHMA BANO
'(
II.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
(Criminal Appeal No. 425 of 2008)
B
MARCH 3, 2008
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM
~
AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ.]
-"""
~
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.482 - Offence of
c kidnapping - Criminal proceedings based on FIR - Quashing
of, sought by appellant on the ground that she was sister of
accused - Held: The FIR only stated that questioning from
appellant would be advantageous and did not indicate
commission of any offence - Rather it put appellant in position
D of witness - No material or a/legation of overt act on her part
made out - Proceedings relatable to FIR liable to be quashed , .~
as no prima facie case made out.
In this appeal, the appellant has challehged the
judgment of High Court dismissing the application under
E s.482 Cr.P.C. and Art.226 of Constitution of India. The
prayer of appellant in the writ petition was to quash the
proceedings initiated against her on the basis of FIR as
she was only sister of main accused. The High Court
dismissed the application holding that on reading of the
-f~ ..
F
FIR, cognizable offence is made out. In the FIR, it was
stated that questioning from the sister of the boy might
be advantageous.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
G
Held: 1. The FIR does not indicate commission of any
offence rather puts the appellant in the position of a
witness. There is not even a scrap of material and not even
allegation of overt act. [Para 4] [780-D, E]
.,,. '
2. The parameters where exercise of inherent power
H
778
RESHMA BANO v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH &
779
ORS. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
under s.482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised either on proof of A
abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the
ends of justice have been highlighted in several cases. In
*Bhajan Lal and Ors., it was held that though it will not be
· possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined
sufficiently channelized and inflexible guidelines or rigid
B
formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of
cases wherein such power should be exercised, certain
illustrative cases were indicated such as where the
allegations made in the first information report or the
complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and c
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie con·stitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused. The case
at hand falls within this illustration given in *Bhajan Lal.
Therefore, the proceedings relatable to FIR are quashed
as far as the appellant is concerned. In other words, on 0
the basis of the existing materials the appellant shall not
be treated to be accused. It is, however, open to the
Investigating Ageocies to examine her as a witness.
[Paras 6, 8] [780-F, G; 781-A, B; 782-D, E]
*State ofHaryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors. 1992 E
Supp. (1) sec 335 - relied on
CRIMINALAPPELLATEJURISDICTION: CriminalAppeal
No. 425 of 2008.
From the final Judgment and Order dated 20.11.2007 of F
the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal
Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 18621 of 2007.
M. Shoeb Auam, T.V. George and Anup Kumar for the
Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
G
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division
Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissing the application filed
H
780
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(2008] 3 S.C.R.
A by the appellant for exercise of power under Section 482 of the
i •
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code') and
...
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the
'Constitution'). The prayer in the writ petition was to quash the
proceedings initiated on the basis of FIR Crime No.316 of2007,
B P.S. Phoolpur, Allahabad. It was submitted before the High Court
that the FIR did not disclose any offence so far as the appellant
is concerned. It was pointed out that the appellant was the sister
_,.
of'the accused no.1 Afzal who was alleged to have committed
,
the offence of kidnapping etc. The High Court dismissed the
c application holding that on reading of the FIR, cognizable offence
is made out.
3. In support of the appeal learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the only reference made to the appellant in the
FIR reads as follows:
D
"Questioning from the sister of the boy, Smt. Resh ma Ba no,
might be advantageous''.
)
4. This does not indicate commission of any offeExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.