The Quashing of complaint or FIR relies on many principles which are consolidated by few Judgements of Hon’ble supreme Court only.
In a recent Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court in Musstt Rehana Begum vs. state of Assam and anr. The Hon’ble supreme court has quashed the complaint filed by the Husband on the ground that the family court has decided the issue in wife favour. That she was not married prior to the marraige and husband has failed to prove the marraige.
The Hon’ble Supreme court relying on their own Judgement
n State of Andhra Pradesh v. Golconda Linga Swamy, a two-judge
Bench of this Court elaborated on the types of materials the High Court can
assess to quash an FIR. The Court drew a distinction between consideration of
materials that were tendered as evidence and appreciation of such evidence.
Only such material that manifestly fails to prove the accusation in the FIR can be
considered for quashing an FIR. The Court held:
“5…..Authority of the court exists for advancement of justice
and if any attempt is made to abuse that authority so as to
produce injustice, the court has power to prevent such abuse. It
would be an abuse of the process of the court to allow any
action which would result in injustice and prevent promotion of
justice. In exercise of the powers court would be justified to
quash any proceeding if it finds that initiation or continuance of
it amounts to abuse of the process of court or quashing of these
proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of justice. When no
offence is disclosed by the complaint, the court may examine
the question of fact. When a complaint is sought to be
quashed, it is permissible to look into the materials to
assess what the complainant has alleged and whether
any offence is made out even if the allegations are
accepted in toto.”
(iii) where the allegations constitute an offence,
but there is no legal evidence adduced or the
evidence adduced clearly or manifestly fails to
prove the charge.
- In dealing with the last category, it is important to
bear in mind the distinction between a case where there
is no legal evidence or where there is evidence which is
clearly inconsistent with the accusations made, and a
case where there is legal evidence which, on
appreciation, may or may not support the accusations.
When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Code, the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon
an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable
or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it
accusation would not be sustained. That is the function
of the trial Judge.
So there are cases where there may be evidence but that may be inconsistent if that is the case the Hon’ble High Court will not interfere. But if there is no evidence then Hon’ble High Court may quash the proceedings.
Which happened in the above mentioned case as there was no evidence the case was quashed.