The Supreme Court found it surprising that a High Court directed the police to let the accused explain the evidence against them before filing charges.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued this directive when denying the quashing of an FIR under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
A bench consisting of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal disapproved of the High Court's order, stating:
Surprisingly, the High Court had noted that the Investigating Officer would allow the appellant to clarify the evidence gathered against them during the investigation before submitting the final report under Section 173 of the CrPC. To put it mildly, this approach is highly unusual and goes against the law.
In this case, the appellant held the position of Assistant Society Manager in the relevant society. The FIR lodged against the accused contained grave allegations of financial misconduct and the misappropriation of funds intended for farmers. Consequently, the High Court declined to dismiss the FIR but mandated that the Investigation Officer grant the petitioner the chance to clarify the evidence gathered against them before final report submission.
The Supreme Court, in its ruling, observed that the High Court had dismissed the appellant's request without delving into the case's substance. Given this context, the Court reinstated the matter to the High Court and prolonged the interim relief that had been provided.
The Court also instructed the Registrar (Judicial) of the Madhya Pradesh High Court to schedule the reinstated petition for hearing before the roster Bench on the morning of December 8, 2023. The involved parties are directed to appear before the roster Bench on that date.
TAGS: Court order direction Registrar (Judicial) Madhya Pradesh High Court restored petition
