LexSOMJEET MALLICK versus STATE OF JHARKHAND & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 893 : 2024 INSC 772 Somjeet Mallick v. State of Jharkhand & Others (Criminal Appeal No. 4190 of 2024) 14 October 2024 [J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the FIR, the cognizance order and the proceedings in pursuance thereof without considering the materials collected during investigation. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.406, 420 – Appellant alleged that as per agreement between the parties, the Truck/Trailor was rented to the accused-respondents for plying for 21 months at monthly rent but after payment of first month’s rent, the rent was not paid despite assurances – Chargesheet filed and cognizance was taken by CJM while the application u/s.482, CrPC filed by respondents was pending before the High Court – High Court quashed the FIR, the cognizance order and the proceedings without considering the materials collected during investigation: Held: At the stage of deciding whether a criminal proceeding or FIR is to be quashed at the threshold or not, the allegations in the FIR or the police report or the complaint, including the materials collected during investigation or inquiry are to be taken at their face value so as to determine whether a prima facie case for investigation or proceeding against the accused is made out – Correctness of the allegations is not to be tested at this stage – Mens rea, an essential ingredient to commit an offence is a question of fact to be inferred from the act in question as well as the surrounding circumstances and conduct of the accused – Thus, when the appellant alleged that the accused despite taking possession of the Truck on hire failed to pay hire charges for months together making false promises for its payment, a prima facie case, reflective of dishonest * Author 894 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports intention on the part of the accused is made out also as regards whether the Truck had been dishonestly disposed of, making out a case of criminal breach of trust which requires investigation – A petition to quash the FIR does not become infructuous on submission of a chargesheet u/s.173 (2), CrPC, but when a chargesheet has been submitted, and if there is no stay on the investigation, the Court must apply its mind to the materials in the police report before quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings – More so, when the FIR alleges an act reflective of a dishonest conduct of the accused – Quashing of FIR at the very inception would thwart a legitimate investigation – Impugned order set aside – Quashing petition remitted to High Court to decide the same considering the materials collected during investigation. [Paras 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23] Criminal Law – FIR – Quashing – FIR not to be quashed, if discloses cognizable offence: Held: FIR not an encyclopedia of all imputations – To test whether an FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence what is to be looked at is not any omission in the accusations but the gravamen of the accusations – At this stage, Court is not required to ascertain as to which specific offence has been committed – It is only at the time of framing charge, when materials collected during investigation are before the Court, that it has to draw an opinion as to for which offence the accused should be tried – Prior to that, if satisfied, the Court may discharge the accused – Thus, when the FIR alleges a dishonest conduct on the part of the accused which, if supported by materials, would disclose commission of a cognizable offence, investigation should not be thwarted by quashing the FIR. [Para 17] List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Penal Code, 1860. List of Keywords Quashing; Quashing petition; Cognizance order; Materials collected during investigation; Truck on hire; Hire charges; Truck rented; Dishonest intention; Mens rea question of fact; Cognizance; Chargesheet; Police report; FIR not encyclopedia; Criminal breach of trust. [2024] 10 S.C.R. 895 Somjeet Mallick v. State of Jharkhand & Others Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 4190 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 01.02.2024 of the High court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in CRMP No. 3796 of 2018 Appearances for Parties Konark Tyagi, Sagar Sarda, Advs. for the Appellant. Rahul Shyam Bhandari, Ms. G. Priyadarshini, Satyam Pathak, Prabhak
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.