STATE OF TAMIL NADU versus THIRUKKURAL PERUMAL

Citation: [1995] 1 S.C.R. 712 · Decided: 31-01-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, FAIZAN UDDIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF Tfi.MIL NADU 
~· 
v. 
THIRUKKURAL PERUMAL 
~" 
JANUARY 31, 1995 
B 
[DR. AS. ANAND AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.] 
Criminal Law-Criminal Procedure Code-Section 48~uashing of 
F.I.R-Cowt cannot embark upon an enquiry as to reliability or genuineness 
of allegations made in F.I.R or complaint on the basis of evidence collected 
c during investigation only. 
An F.1.R was lodged against the respondent alleging commission of 
offences under Sections 147/148/342/323/395/SOO(ii) and 109 IPC. The 
respondent filed a petition under S.482 Cr. P.C. in the High Court for 
quashing of the F.I.R. The High Court quashed the F.I.R. against which 
J_ 
D the present appeal has been filed. 
' 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : The power of quashing of F .I.R. and criminal proceedings 
should be exercised sparingly by the courts. Indeed, the High Court has 
E the extra-ordinary or inherent power to reach out injustice and quash the 
F.I.R. and criminal proceedings but the same has to be done with cir· 
cumspection. The normal process of the criminal trial cannot be cut short 
in a rather casual manner. The High Court was not justified in embarking 
+ 
upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness of the allegations made 
-
F in the F.I.R. or the complaint on the basis of the evidence collected during 
investigation only. [713-G-H] 
State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors., [1992) Supp. 1 SCC 
335, relied upon. 
G 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
218of1995 
-
From the Judgment and Order dated 9.11.93 of the Madras High 
Court in Cd. O.P. No. 8730 of 1992. 
H 
K.V. Venkataraman for the Appellant. 
712 
..... 
+ 
STATE OF T.N. v. T. PERUMAL 
713 
V<G. Pragasam for the Respondent. 
A 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
This appeal arises out of an order made by a learned single Judge B 
of the High Court of Judicature at Madras on 9th November, 1993, in 
Criminal Original Petition No. 8730/92, Crl. M.P. No. 4794/92 and Crl. M.P. 
No. 6765/92. The learned Judge quashed the First Information Report, 
Crime No. 246/92 of P.S. Tallakulam, in so far as the respondent is 
concerned as also the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom against C 
him. 
We have gone through the order of the learned Single Judge and 
heard learned counsel for the parties. 
M.S.K. Shanmugovel Chettiyar lodged a first information report at D 
P.S. Tallakulam against the respondents alleging commission of offences 
under Sections 147/148/342/323/395/SOO(ii) and 109 IPC. Investigation was 
taken in hand and some evidence was collected by the investigating agency. 
The respondent filed a. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the High 
Court and by the imugned order the petition was allowed and the proceed-
ings emanating from crime case 246/92 (supra) were quashed. From a bare E 
perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge it appears that while 
quashing the proceedings reliance, has been placed upon some evidence 
collected ..by the investigating agency during the investigation. The ap-
proach of the learned Judge in relying upon such evidence, which is yet to 
be produced before the trial court, to quash the criminal proceedings in p 
crime case No. 246/92 (supra) was not proper. The power of quashing a 
FIR and criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly by the courts. 
Indeed, the High Court has the extra-ordinary or inherent power to reach 
out injustice and 11uash the First Information Report and criminal proceed-
ings, keeping in view the guidelines laid down by this Court in various 
judgments (reference in this connection may be made with advantage to G 
State of Ha1yana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors., [1992] Supp. 1 SCC 335 but 
the same has to be done with circumspection. The normal process of the 
criminal trial cannot be cut short in a rather casual manner. The Court, is 
not justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuine- . 
ness of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint on the basis of H 
714 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1995] 1 S.C.R. 
A the evidence collec~ed during investigation only while dealing with a peti-
tion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking the quashing of the FIR and the 
criminal proceedings. The learned Single Judge apparently fell into an 
error in evaluating the genuineness and reliability of the allegations made 
in the FIR on the basis of the evidence collected during the investigation. 
B The order of the learned Single Ju
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.