1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1438/2007 Jai Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of Order: 12th April, 2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Rinesh Gupta, for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Maheshwari, for the respondent no.2. Mr. G.S. Fauzdar, Public Prosecutor for the State. ----- By way of this criminal misc. petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner Jai Singh has implored to quash FIR No. 189/2007 registered for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC at police station Civil Line, Ajmer. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 as also the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and carefully perused the relevant material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that the occurrence of this case took place on 16th July, 1990 and the FIR was lodged on 17th July, 1990. The petitioner filed a civil suit for specific performance and with a view to counter it, the complainant – respondent no.2 lodged a false report against him. The FIR did not disclose any commission of offence, hence, 2 the same deserves to be quashed. 4. E converso, learned counsel for the complainant – respondent contended that the suit for specific performance filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned Civil Court. The agreement, which is talked about, was sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory and the signatures of Shobha Singh were found to have been forged by the petitioner. He further contended that even if the civil suit is pending and the facts of the First Information Report discloses the element of cheating, the criminal proceedings also may proceed against the person. He further argued that the petition is totally devoid of force and the same deserves to be dismissed. 5. It has been consistently held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments that inherent powers should be exercised by the High Court sparingly with circumspection in the rarest of rare cases. These powers should be exercised to prevent the abuse of the process of Court or to meet the ends of justice. The First Information Report can be quashed only in that situation when the contents of FIR do not disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. If the contents of the FIR do disclose the commission of a cognizable offence, the matter is required to be investigated by the police. It 3 is the exclusive domain of police to investigate a cognizable case. The courts are not required to interfere with the investigation of any cognizable offence. 6. In the instant petition, the petitioner is alleged to have forged the signatures of respondent no.2 Shobha Singh on an agreement. When this agreement was sent for obtaining expert opinion to Forensic Science Laboratory, it was found that the petitioner forged the signatures of Shobha Singh on the agreement. The agreement on the basis of which the petitioner is found to have filed a civil suit for specific performance, has not only been found to be forged but the civil suit has also been dismissed by the learned civil court. The Investigating Officer of the case is present in the Court. He submits that he has concluded the investigation and merely a police report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. is required to be forwarded to the court by the Station House Officer, police station Civil Line, Ajmer. Since, the investigation is complete and merely the challan is required to be filed, in such a situation, I do not find any material on record to quash the First Information Report No. 189/2007 registered with the police station Civil Line, Ajmer. The petition is found to be totally devoid of substance and the same 4 deserves to be dismissed. 7. For the reasons stated above, the criminal misc. petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. being bereft of any merit stands dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI), J. Mak/- 64