http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF TAMIL NADU

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THIRUKKURAL PERUMAL

DATE OF JUDGMENT31/01/1995

BENCH: ANAND, A.S. (J) BENCH: ANAND, A.S. (J) FAIZAN UDDIN (J)

CITATION:  1995 SCC  (2) 449        JT 1995 (3)   166  1995 SCALE  (1)423

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: ORDER 1.   Leave granted. 2.   This  appeal arises out of an order made by  a  learned Single  Judge 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. 6765/92.   The learned  Judge quashed the First Information  Report,  Crime No.  246/92 of P.S. Tallakulam, in so far as the  respondent to  concerned  as also the  criminal  proceedings  emanating therefrom against him. 3.   We  have gone through the order of the  learned  Single Judge and heard learned counsel for the parties. 4.   M.S.K.Shanmugovol Chettiyar lodged a first  information report  at P.S. Tallakulam against the respondents  alleging commission of offences under Section 147/148/342/323/395/500 (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 impugned  order  the  petition  was allowed and the proceedings emanating from crime case 246/92 (supra)  were quashed.  From a bare 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 approach 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  crime cases  No.246/92  (supra)  was not  proper.   The  power  of quashing a FIR and criminal proceedings should be  exercised sparingly  by  the Courts.  Indeed, the High Court  has  the extra-ordinary or inherent power to reach out injustice  and quash the First Information Report and criminal proceedings, keeping  in view the guidelines laid down by this  Court  in various judgments (reference in this connection may be  made with  advantage to State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan  Lal  &

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Ors.  (1992 Supp. (1) 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 genuineness of the allegations made  in  the FIR of the complaint on the basis of the evidence  collected during  investigation  only while dealing  with  a  petition under  Section 432 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. The order of the learned single Judge cannot, therefore,  be sustained.   This  appeal  succeeds  and  is  allowed.   The impugned order of the High Court is hereby set aside. 5.   We  clarify  that nothing said hereinabove  or  by  the learned  single  Judge  of the High Court  in  the  impugned judgment  shall be constructed as any expression of  opinion on  the merits of the case, expressly or impliedly, and  the trial court shall deal with 168 the case uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the High Court or by this Court. 170