Plea to quash FIR cannot lie under Article 32: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that moving a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India 1950 is not an appropriate remedy for quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) or other criminal proceedings [Gayatri Prasad Prajapati v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others]..A Division Bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed that such a relief which can be considered by High Court Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) cannot be considered by top court in an Article 32 petition."It is not expected that the relief which can be considered by the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code 1973 to be considered by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 32 of the Constitution of India," the Court said.The Court, therefore, declined to entertain a plea by former Uttar Pradesh minister Gayatri Prasad Prajapati..The top Court observed the same while considering the request of the petitioner-counsel seeking permission to withdraw the said petition since the same by a passage of time had become infructuous."Even otherwise, we are of the opinion that such type of Writ Petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, for the relief(s) prayed to quash and set aside the criminal proceedings/FIR ought not to have been filed," the Court said..Advocate Hemlata Rawat appeared for the petitioner..Similar observation was made by the apex court in its decision in Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India and Others (2020), where a three-Judge bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi had observed that:"Whether the allegations contained in the FIR do or do not make out any offence as alleged will not be decided in pursuance of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32, to quash the FIR. The petitioner must be relegated to the pursuit of the remedies available under the CrPC, which we hereby do. The petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy available before the High Court. We should not be construed as holding that a petition under Article 32 is not maintainable. But when the High Court has the power under Section 482, there is no reason to by-pass the procedure under the CrPC, we see no exceptional grounds or reasons to entertain this petition under Article 32.".[Read Order]