Site icon Legal Vidhiya

RAM KISHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN (2021)

Admin
Advertisements
Spread the love
CITATION(2021) 4 SCC 778
DATE OF JUDGEMENT09 April 2021
COURTSupreme Court of India
APPELLANTRam Kishan
RESPONDENTState of Rajasthan, Ms. Ratna Gupta and Ms. Usha Gupta 
BENCHVineet Saran, L. Nageswara Rao, S. A. Bobde

INTRODUCTION

The case of Ram Kishan vs. State of Rajasthan states about quashing of FIR by the Rajasthan High Court. Later the Supreme Court opined that the said quashing of FIR was decided to be erred by the Rajasthan High Court on 9th April 2021. The case was initially decided by the lower court of Rajasthan which was challenged by the appellant in High Court of Rajasthan. 

FACTS 

  1. The appellant, a Police Constable along with a Sub Inspector of Police and another Police Constable were doing their duty of checking all the vehicles passing from the road on 21st July 2006 in the evening.
  2. At 9.15 pm, one motorcycle passing from the road was stopped by them. Mr. Deepak Gupta, the rider of the motorcycle was asked about the papers of the vehicle.
  3. Without showing the said papers, on the pretext of talking with someone over mobile, he fled away. He returned after 20 minutes in a Maruti Car with two ladies, the respondents of the case, Ms. Ratna Gupta and Ms. Usha Gupta.
  4. Ms. Ratna Gupta, an inspector in Rajasthan Police started uttering caste related abuses to the appellant and asked the appellant what kind of power he possesses to stop the motorcycle even after mentioning her name. She held the collar of the appellant, slapped and beat him and fled away from the place.

ISSUES 

  1. Whether the evidences presented by respondent and allegations mentioned in FIR were admissible, sufficient and factual to be exercised against the appellant?
  2. Whether the respondent’s action gave rise to applicability of section 332 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code?
  3. Whether the Rajasthan High Court’s judgement lacked adequate reasoning and consideration making it difficult to understand reason behind decision that lead Supreme Court to set aside High Court’s order? 

CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT

  1. An FIR No. 217 of 2006 was filed on 21st July 2006 at 9.45 pm by the appellant. The FIR was regarding the rash behaviour of Ms. Ratna Gupta who was also an inspector in Rajasthan Police. She not only abused the appellant through words but also held the collar, slapped and beat the appellant.
  2. Appellant also stated that the Rajasthan High Court failed to consider the Injury Report dated 22nd July 2006 filed by the appellant which was submitted by the Medical and Health Department of the Government of Rajasthan.
  3. The appellant contended that the said FIR was filed first and was legitimate. 
  4. Appellant further contended that the submissions made by him were ignored by the Rajasthan High Court, giving a one sided judgement.

CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENT 

  1. Cross FIR No.218 of 2006 was lodged by Mr. Deepak Gupta on 22nd July 2006 alleging that he was stopped by the appellant and asked for Rs. 100 (Rupees One Hundred) late in the evening of 21st July 2006. When the amount was not paid, the appellant assaulted Mr. Deepak Gupta. 
  2. It was also alleged in the same FIR that the appellant behaved indecently with Ms. Usha Gupta, respondent and tore her clothes. She was mentioned to be accompanied by Mr. Deepak Gupta in the motorcycle.
  3. Respondents contended that the FIR No. 217 of 2006 filed by appellant was false and was filed with the intention to retaliate against the complaint filed by respondents.
  4. Respondents further stated that their FIR No. 218 of 2006 was not registered immediately and the delay affected its credibility.
  5. By the order dated 24th July 2018, court recorded that respondent Ms. Ratna Gupta who appeared in person was not in position to make her submissions properly and therefore an Amicus Curiae was appointed.

JUDGEMENT

Appellant filed special leave petition challenging the order of High Court dated 23rd January 2015 which quashed the FIR. After hearing the counsel and the Amicus Curiae, the Supreme Court was of the opinion that the quashing of FIR No. 217 of 2006 by the Rajasthan High Court was solely unreasonable and cannot be justified by law because of following reason as stated by the Supreme Court:

  1. The matter under FIR No. 217 of 2006 was still under investigation and the said FIR was filed a day earlier than of filing of FIR No.218 of 2006 so it was not appropriate for the High Court to have substituted its own opinion that the FIR No. 217 of 2006 was filed as counter blast.
  2.  The Rajasthan High Court also failed to consider the Injury Report dated 22nd July 2006 filed by the appellant submitted by the Medical Officer of Medical and Health Department of the Government of Rajasthan. 
  3. The submissions advanced on behalf of appellant though recorded were also not considered in the order while quashing the FIR No. 217 of 2006. 

The Supreme Court reversed the order dated 23rd January 2015 passed by the Rajasthan High Court. It directed the police to submit its report under section 173 of Cr.P.C. after conducting investigation for FIR No. 217 of 2006. It was directed that investigation should be concluded as expeditiously as possible. The judgement was delivered by the bench with a unanimous decision.

ANALYSIS

 This case revolves around the Rajasthan High Court’s decision of quashing of FIR and Supreme Court declaring it as an erroneous decision. The credibility of evidences and witnesses and the basis of lawful principles applied in this case come into question when High Court quashes the FIR filed by Appellant. The Supreme Court not only reversed the decision of Rajasthan High Court, but also it directed to undertake investigation and submit required report and to pronounce the long awaited decision of the case.   

CONCLUSION

This case provides the importance of carrying out investigation expeditiously after receiving the FIR. The decision of the Rajasthan High Court shows assumption derived unreasonably and unjustified by law. The High Court can also pass an erred decision at times. However, it is necessary to conclude a case with a judgement that is backed with a strong reasoning. 

REFERENCES

  1. Indian Kanoon https://indiankanoon.org/doc/71630030/
  2. The Laws https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/browse/Case?CaseId=001202063000
  3. Latest Laws https://www.latestlaws.com/latest-caselaw/2021/april/2021-latest-caselaw-195-sc/

This Article is written by Kavita Rajendra Amin, student of DES’s Shri Navalmal Firodia Law College, Pune; intern at Legal Vidhiya.

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.

PDF 📄
Exit mobile version