Another judgment from hon’ble Apex Court where it was held that if there are evidences in support of FIR, using 482 CrPC to quash FIR is not to be invoked.
Order
State Of U.P Vs O.P. Sharma on 6 February, 1996The appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the High Court is set aside. Investigating Officer is directed to complete the investigation within four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order and the appropriate Court would dispose of the case within six months therefrom.
Good judgment of hon’ble Supreme Court wherein it was held that, though the search may be illegal but the
evidence collected, i.e., Panchnama etc., nonetheless would be admissible at the trial. At the stage of
filing charge-sheet it cannot be said that there is no evidence and the Magistrate or the Sessions
Judge would be committing illegality to discharge the accused on the ground that Section 50 or
other provisions have not been complied with. At the trial an opportunity would be available to the
prosecution to prove that the search was conducted in accordance with law. Even if search is found
to be in violation of law, what weight should be given to the evidence collected is yet another
question to be gone into. Under these circumstances, the learned Sessions Judge was not justified in
discharging the accused, after filing of the charge-sheet holding that mandatory requirements of
Section 50 had not been complied with.
Bad Behavior has blocked 766 access attempts in the last 7 days.
