HC quashes FIR in rape case

Excelsior Correspondent

JAMMU, Nov 29: High Court has quashed FIR No.23/2022 registered with Police Station Majalata in a rape case with the observations that the power of investigation without knowing the province of investigation is the bane of police investigation proving to be failure in bringing home successful prosecution of criminal cases in the courts of law.
After hearing Senior Advocate Abhinav Sharma with Advocate Abhimanyu Sharma for the applicant, Justice Rahul Bharti observed, “while the power of investigation is given by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the province of investigation is provided by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872”.
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 provides when a fact is to be held proved/disproved and not proved before a court of law. It is by this principle of proof that a court of law enables itself to make verdict in a case/cause, be it a civil or criminal cause getting trial before it.
It is through the field of facts as envisaged under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 that the police investigation has to charter itself to identify the true facts of accusation. The very definition of “Fact in Issue” & “Relevant Fact” as given in the very opening of Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are encyclopaedic of what is to come out before a court of law either in a civil case or criminal case before it in which a court of law has to make an adjudication.
“It is with respect to this definition of “Fact” that definition of expressions “proved, disproved and not proved” come into play through judgment making of a court of law dealing with trial of case/cause. The Police Investigation has to be led and driven by the domain concepts of “Facts in Issue” and “Relevant Facts”, High Court said, adding “if a given Police Investigation has least bothered to follow the script of said two domains, then in the name of Police Investigation what is taking place would be nothing but paper collection and compilation venture by the Investigation Officer so as to claim the service credit of having prepared and submitted a police report/challan in a court of law unmindful of its soundness and sustainability”.
“In the present case, only an empty formality has been carried out by the Investigation Officer leaving the truth of the case a casualty. In fact, the very FIR on the face of it pointed towards a fact that its latent objective was to force the petitioner to part with the marriage related documents and photographs for enabling the respondent to act as per the dictate of her parents”, High Court said, adding “thus FIR and so called investigation are act of abuse of process of law aimed against the petitioner and others named therein and as such both are quashed”.