Where the prosecution submits a cancellation report after rejection of an earlier untraced report, petitions seeking quashing of the FIR under Section 482 CrPC may be rendered infructuous. This judgment upholds existing procedure, offering binding authority within the jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and clarifying the effect of subsequent investigative steps on pending quashing petitions.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/28720/2024 of BONIA INDUSTRIES PVT LTD Vs STATE OF PUNJAB |
| CNR | PHHC010736872024 |
| Date of Registration | 29-05-2024 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding within Punjab and Haryana High Court jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure |
| Questions of Law | Effect of subsequent cancellation report on pending quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC |
| Ratio Decidendi |
Where, during pendency of a petition for quashing under Section 482 CrPC, the prosecution files a subsequent cancellation report, the petition is rendered infructuous. The court emphasized that when further proceedings negate the factual substratum of the petition, judicial intervention is not required. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petition for quashing of FIR under Section 381 IPC and related order rejecting untraced report, subsequent submission of cancellation report by prosecution. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Punjab and Haryana High Court jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that the filing of a subsequent cancellation report during the pendency of a quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC renders the petition infructuous.
- Petitions seeking quashing of FIRs may need to be reassessed if the prosecution alters its stance through subsequent investigative steps.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that after the order rejecting the untraced report, the prosecution submitted a new cancellation report.
- In light of the updated report, the court deemed the petition for quashing the FIR to have become infructuous.
- The reasoning rests on the absence of a live controversy requiring adjudication once the basis for the petition has changed.
- No further judicial intervention was warranted, and the matter was disposed of accordingly.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought quashing of FIR No.0166 dated 30.05.2017 under Section 381 IPC and related order rejecting the untraced report.
State
- Submitted that a new cancellation report had been filed after the order dated 07.06.2023.
Factual Background
A petition was filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR No.0166 dated 30.05.2017 registered under Section 381 IPC at Police Station Division-E, Amritsar, and to challenge the order rejecting the untraced report and directing further investigation. After the filing of the petition, and following the order rejecting the untraced report, the prosecution filed a subsequent cancellation report relating to the same FIR.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 482 CrPC: Inherent powers of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings.
- Section 381 IPC: Covers the offence for which the FIR had originally been registered.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing procedure as to how subsequent investigative steps may affect pending petitions affirmed.