[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 256/2008 SANDEEP BANSAL & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. Date: 20.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh for the petitioners. Mr. Arun Sharma, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** The complainant is present in the Court, therefore, service is sufficient. By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners are seeking quashment of FIR No. 29/2008 registered against them at Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar for the offence under Section 363/366 IPC. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioner No.1 Sandeep Bansal and petitioner No.2 Smt. Mona are major and married and are living happily as husband and wife and the FIR which has been lodged by the complainant is just to harass them and they have apprehended that the police will unnecessarily harass them. Learned counsel for the petitioners also produced certificate to show that the girl attains majority. [2] Be that as it may, it is expected from the police to investigate into the matter fairly and properly whether the girl attains majority or not, but in any case, on this pretext the FIR in question cannot be quashed and set-aside in view of the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and another Vs. Shri P.P. Sharma and another, AIR 1991 SC 1260, has held that the appreciation of evidence is the function of the criminal Courts. The High Court, under the circumstances, could not have assumed jurisdiction and put an end to the process of investigation and trial provided under the law and mere allegations of mala fide against informant and investigating officer cannot be basis for quashing proceedings. Similar view has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. B.R. Bajaj and others, AIR 1994 SC 1256, wherein it has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that FIR containing some important allegations which make out a cognizable offence at that stage and registration of FIR was only beginning of investigation and quashing of FIR by the High Court [3] is not proper- Treating whole matter as though it was an appeal against the order of conviction was not permissible in exercising inherent power under Section 482 particularly at stage of FIR when same discloses commission of cognizable offence which had still to be investigated thoroughly by police. Therefore, in view of the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of State of Bihar and another Vs. Shri P.P. Sharma and another (supra) and Union of India and others Vs. B.R. Bajaj and others (supra) as also in the case of State of Haryana And Others Vs. Bhajan Lal And Others, 1992 Supp(1) SCC 335, this Court do not find any merit in the instant misc. petition. No case for quashing the FIR No. FIR No. 29/2008 registered at Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar for the offence under Section 363/366 IPC, is made out. Consequently, the misc. petition fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/ [4] S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLN. NO. 153/2008 IN S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 256/2008 SANDEEP BANSAL & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. Date: 20.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh for the petitioners. Mr. Arun Sharma, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** As the criminal misc. petition has been dismissed today, the stay application also stands dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/