In this Article we will endeavour to understand when the High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can quash a First Information Report, Charge-sheet or even a summons by a Magistrate in a criminal case. The Powers of the High Court to quash such First Information Report, Charge-sheet or even a summons by a Magistrate in a criminal case can be exercised certain scenarios, through this Article we will explore the scenarios in detail.

Sharad Prasad Sinha v/s State Of Bihar: There was a club in Patna, which was subject to a raid by the Excise Commissioner, as men and women were singing and dancing. As per the Law in Bihar at that time, permission had to be obtained from the District Magistrate, due to that failure, he was booked. As per the Law the women who First Information Report, Charge-sheet or even a summons by a Magistrate in a criminal case were performing in the club, had to be " employed" there, since there was no employment per se of these women, power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was exercised, and the criminal charges were quashed.

State Of Haryanav/s Bhajan Lal: In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court declined to quash the First Information Report pertaining to corruption, however the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down these instances, when the case could be quashed.

These are the scenarios when the First Information Report or Charge-sheet can be quashed, they are as follows:

1. When the allegations fail to disclose a prima-facie case.
2. When the allegations do not disclose a cognizable offense.
3. When the allegations are inherently improbable and absurd.
4. When there is an express Legal Bar.
5. When the criminal proceedings are purely mala-fide or have ulterior motives.

The powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are mostly exercised to quash proceedings under Cheating, Criminal Breach of Trust, and other allied offenses. Let us examine through case-Law, how the Courts deal with such cases.

1. Binod Vs State Of Bihar [(2014) 10 SCC 663]:
   In this case a contractor had been engaged by a University in Bihar to do certain work for the University, some of payment invoices were put on hold, as they had to be verified. He registered a case of Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust, and the Patna HC declined to exercise its power of quashing under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
    
2. Supreme Court: The Supreme Court quashed the FIR and Chargesheet, stating that for a case of Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust to survive, it is essential that there be dishonest intent, mala-fide representation, hence the case was quashed.
    
3. Prof. Rk. Vidyasarthy Vs Sudha Seetharam [(Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 2019):
   Rajiv Vidyasarthy was married to Savitha Seetharam, they moved to the United States of America, and they also had a child, his wife got into an accident in the USA. They subsequently separated, and there were multiple rounds of litigation. Rajiv had transferred a sum of Rs 20,00,000/- (Twenty-Lakh Rupees only) to his wife, and he filed a recovery Suit for that. Criminal Complaint was filed by his in-Laws alleging that the money was returned to them, FIR of Cheating and Criminal breach of Trust was lodged. Supreme Court quashed the First Information Report on as they said there was no entrustment, hence no offense made out for Criminal Breach of Trust, also since there was no entrustment, no case made out under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
    
4. Vijay Kumar Ghai Vs State Of West Bengal[ (2022) 7 SCC 124]:
   A company running in the name and style of M/S Priknit Retails Pvt Ltd was there, another entity called SMC Global Securities Pvt Ltd wanted to make an investment in Priknit Retails, which they did, in lieu of the investment there was to be share allotment, which did not happen, and a case under Cheating and Criminal breach of Trust was lodged. Supreme Court quashed the Criminal Complaint said that for an offense of cheating, there must be an intention to deceive from the very inception, which is missing in the present scenario. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also held that the establish the offense of criminal breach of trust, there must be an element of entrustment with property, which the Accused person should have misused in an impermissible manner.
    
5. Mariam Fasihuddin Vs State Of Adugodi Police Station [(Criminal Appeal No. 3305 of 2024):
   In this the Hon'ble Supreme Court said that the wife who had forged her husband's signature for their minor child to get a United Kingdom passport cannot have said to have committed the offense of forgery and cheating as there was no intent to deprive/cheat anyone, there was no Mens-Rea and hence quashed the criminal proceedings.
    
6. Vishal Noble Singh Vs State Of Uttar Pradesh [SLP(CRL) 2389 OF 2023]:
   It was alleged that Vishal Noble Singh had forged matriculation certificates and had siphoned off money. Since none of the ingredients were made out, the FIR as well as the Charge-sheet were quashed.

On referring to these judgements, one gets the impression that the Courts automatically quash all FIR'S and Charge-sheets pertaining to Cheating, forgery, and Criminal Breach of Trust, however that is not the case, let us examine some case scenarios where the Courts have declined to quash FIR/Charge-sheet of aforesaid cases.

• Indian Oil Corporation vs NEPC- Indian Oil (Criminal Appeal No. 834 of 2002):
  Indian Oil was to supply aviation fuel to NEPC, since they did not fulfil their payment obligations, their aircraft were hypothecated to Indian Oil as well. NEPC moved its aircraft away from the jurisdiction of Indian Oil, which lead to Indian Oil filing civil as well as criminal action against NEPC. Supreme Court declined to quash the criminal proceedings on the ground that civil Law remedies were availed, and said that at the stage of 482, the only thing which must be seen is whether the allegations in the Complaint/FIR are made out.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vesa Holdings vs State of Kerela also opined that, simultaneous Civil and Criminal proceedings can exist for the same transaction. Let us now examine some of the scenarios related to hate speech, incitement to violence and other allied provisions, in which the Courts have quashed First Information Report and Chargesheet's.

• Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs State Of Jammu And Kashmir (Criminal Appeal No. 81 of 1997):
  The Petitioner was charged under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for inciting religious hatred against other religions. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that merely inciting hatred without any specific reference to that religion or community will not attract Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
   
• Patricia Murkhiem Vs State Of Meghalaya ([ (2021) 15 SCC 35)-):
  There was an attack on non-tribal youth by tribals, which lead to the Petitioner writing a post on Facebook criticizing the State Government for not taking prompt action, and not safeguarding the rights of non-tribals in the State. The Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the First Information Report and the Charge-sheet under Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the ground that there was no Mens-Rea.

Let us now examine some factual circumstances wherein the offenses relating to Criminal Intimidation and Breach of Peace were quashed by the Courts.

• Fiona Shrikhande Vs State Of Maharashtra (2013) 14 SCC):
  The Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed a First Information Report pertaining to Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 stating that to constitute offense under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 there should be intention insult, mere abuse will not constitute offense under the Section.
   
• Manik Taneja Vs State Of Karnataka And Anr [ 2015) 7 SCC 423]:
  After the Petitioner had an altercation with a Police Officer they were booked under the provision of criminal intimidation under the Indian Penal Code, 1860.The Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the FIR and stipulated that mere expression of words without any intent will not constitute the offense.

Conclusion:
It is lucid that that the Courts will quash the offenses under its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 if the offenses are not made out in the First Information Report or the Charge-sheet.

Also Read:

• Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guidelines set out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India