BHARAT S CHOLERA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. K.L. Pandya for respondent No.1-State and learned advocate Mr. Tulshi R. Savani for respondent No.2- original complainant, waive service of Rule. By consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) THE petitioner, who is an advocate, has invoked the inherent power of this Court by filing this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to quash the FIR registered with Mangrol Police Station, Surat (Rural) on 23.9.2011 as C.R. No.I-50 of 2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 34, 120-B, 447, 379, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) LEARNED advocate Shri B.N. Nair appearing for the petitioner submitted that taking the allegations in the FIR on their face value, the petitioner cannot be said to have committed any offence, as alleged in the FIR. He submitted that what is alleged in the FIR is that the accused who conspired to create bogus documents, got such documents made by the petitioner, who is an advocate. He submitted that if such act on the part of the petitioner of making or drafting any document as an advocate is taken as an offence, then no advocate, who is drafting the documents, could be safe because such advocate could be put to harassment at the instance of anybody who wants to put such advocate in difficulty or trouble for any reason. He further submitted that prior to lodging of the FIR, this very informant filed private complaint on 31.5.2011, which is annexed at Annexure-I (page 78), wherein the petitioner was arraigned as accused No.12 and in the said complaint also, the allegation against the petitioner was of taking active part in preparing all the documents and except that, there was no other allegation about forging of the documents by the petitioner or playing any role in making of forged documents. He submitted that the said private complaint was withdrawn subsequently and what remains in the FIR wherein the petitioner is not alleged to have played any role of making false documents or committing any offences as alleged in the FIR. He submitted that arraigning the petitioner as accused in the private complaint and subsequently in the FIR is nothing but a pressurizing tactic of respondent No.2- informant to settle the score of the civil disputes between the parties. He submitted that when the allegations against the petitioner do not constitute any of the offences alleged against the petitioner, permitting such FIR to be investigated against the petitioner would be an abuse of the process of law and therefore, such FIR is required to be quashed to sub-serve the interest of justice by exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Code insofar as the petitioner is concerned.