é;~¢§;:;zwé W ékyEWM 3'“ g‘ 0\ V‘Q’.............. @ I BEFORE THE HON’ELE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 1; WRIT PETITION [ Cm] NO. §S€3[2007 PETITIONER :— (J Ram Krishna Jangde S/o Shri Dharam Singh Jangde, aged about 42 years, Advocate, R/o EWS— 140, Sector—4, Pt. Deendaya] Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur [C.G.] VERSUS RESPONDENTS :- / 1] State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur [C.G.] / 2] Superintendent of Police, Raipur, District Raipur [C.G.} 3] Officer-in~charge, Police station —- Gole Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur [C.G.]. WRI 0v T PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE \K CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT-BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 5563 OF 2007 Petitioner Ram Krishna Jangde Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others. Respondents WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :- Shri Jeet Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia-, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State/ respondents. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 30thday of Jury, 2010) 1. On the basis of complaint made by Smt. Bharti R. Solanki filed before the police in-charge, police station- Gole Bazar, Raipur, the case has been registered against the petitioner. The petitioner seeks quashing of the complaint on the ground that the allegation whatever has been made against the petitioner is not correct. On bare perusal of the complaint, it cannot be held that even pr/ma facie case has not been made out against the petitioner. Law is well settled that FIR /complaint can be quashed only on prima facie perusal of the FIR/ complaint when no case has been made out against the petitioner. ln the case on hand, a complaint has been made against the petitioner, wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner was a party to the alleged commission of offence. Thus, at this stage, FIR / complaint cannot be quashed, if the petitioner has any defence, he is at liberty to present himself before the judicial officer trying the case. 4. lt is trite that the Court should exercise the power of quashing the FIR or criminal proceedings in the rarest of rare cases. The Court should not embark upon an enquiry asto the reliability or genuineness or othen/vise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint. u. , The Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and Others vs. B'hajan Lal and Others1 observed that the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of india may be exercised if the FIR or the compiaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused; Subsequently, the ratio laid down in Bhajan Lal (supra), has been referred with approval in Manzar Sayeed Khan vs. State of Maharashtra and Anotherz, in Reshma Bano vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others3 and in Goondla Venkateswarlu vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Another". For the reasons mentioned hereinabove and applying the well settled principles of law to the facts of the case on hand‘ the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order asto costs. Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ashok 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 2 3 (2007) 5 scc 1 4 (2008) 5 soc 791 (2008) 9 scc 613 l