Appeal
Appeal against the quashing of FIR
2. The appellant, Abhishek Singh, is the complainant and has approached this Court aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 12th November, 2024, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No.67884 of 2023, whereby the respondents’ application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was allowed and the First Information Report dated 7th September 2023 filed by him under Sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18602 , being Mithanpura P.S. Case No.393 of 2023, was quashed.
Facts
Facts simplified (para.3 in judgment)
Abhishek Singh, a businessman, took a loan of ₹7,70,000 from Bank of India by giving 254 grams of 22-carat gold ornaments as security on July 22, 2020. The problem started when he had to repay the loan. The bank sent him a notice on October 7, 2022, asking him to pay ₹8,01,383.59 (including interest). He paid this amount on March 31, 2023. Later, the bank revalued the gold and charged him ₹1,500 as fees. When he asked for his gold back, the bank refused. The bank claimed he didn’t repay the loan, so they kept the gold. The bank’s new valuation said the gold was fake—just gold plated over other metals. Because of this, a police case was registered against Abhishek Singh on May 22, 2023. Another FIR was filed after Abhishek asked the authorities to investigate. Ajay Kumar, the bank’s Branch and Credit Manager, was involved during the revaluation.
Impugned judgment
4. Having completed its investigation into the appellant’s allegations, the investigating authorities filed a chargesheet before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (East) Mithanpura, having the particulars as Final Report/Chargesheet No.371/24, dated 30th September, 2024. While the investigation was still underway, the respondents filed an application seeking quashing of the FIR on 5 th October, 2023. It is in this application that the impugned judgment came to be passed.
Analysis
8. We have given our consideration to the multifarious arguments advanced at the bar.
Scope and Power to quash and set aside proceedings explained
9. The scope of the Court’s power to quash and set aside proceedings is well-settled to warrant any restatement. While the arguments advanced have the potential to raise many issues for consideration, we must first satisfy ourselves as to the propriety of the exercise of such power by the High Court. The task of the High Court, when called upon to adjudicate an application seeking to quash the proceedings, is to see whether, prima facie, an offence is made out or not. It is not to examine whether the charges may hold up in the Court. In doing so, the area of action is circumscribed.
Factual analysis
13. It is true that the appellant repaid the amount, but with substantial delay. However, once the loan is settled, it is difficult to understand as to why the gold was revalued and auctioned.
Fraud if happened is a matter for trial
14. Still further, the discussion made by the High Court in quashing the FIR in no way addresses the possibility of the respondents’ possible involvement in the misappropriation of the gold pledged. There was no third-party verification undertaken by the bank to corroborate the findings returned by the 2nd valuer, so it cannot be positively ruled out, without appreciating the evidence, that all the persons involved from the bank or outside (valuers) did not commit any act affecting appellant’s pledged gold. In any event, at all times the appellant had no access to the gold which, after its initial valuation, was always kept in the safe custody of the bankers. Fraud, if any, whether perpetrated at the first instance of valuation, or later, is a matter which could be unearthed only after a trial based on the evidence led by the parties. But, as of now, in no circumstances, it can be said that no prima facie case regarding commission of an offence, as alleged in the FIR, is made out from its perusal.
Conclusion
High Court’s order set aside
15. In that view of the matter, we hold that the High Court had improperly quashed the proceedings initiated by the appellant. It stands clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the matter, and the guilt or innocence of the respondents has to be established in the trial, in accordance with the law. The proceedings out of the subject FIR, mentioned in paragraph 2 are revived and restored to the file of the concerned Court.
Appeal allowed
16. The appeal is allowed. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the learned Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Patna, who shall send forthwith a copy of this order to the concerned Court for necessary action.
Judgments cited or involved
1. Priyanka Srivastava v. State of UP
– Abstract: Requires an affidavit to be attached to the FIR for it to be sustainable; absence of affidavit may lead to quashing of FIR – Citation: (2015) 6 SCC 287
2. Rajeev Kourav v. Baisahab
– Abstract: High Court’s power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings is limited to cases where the FIR or charge-sheet lacks ingredients of an offence; evidence in defense is generally not considered at this stage – Citation: (2020) 3 SCC 317
3. Naresh Aneja v. State of U.P.
– Abstract: Court must be satisfied prima facie offences are made out under Section 482 CrPC without conducting a mini-trial or detailed evidence examination – Citation: (2025) 2 SCC 604.
Acts and Sections involved
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.)
– Section 156(3)
– Section 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)
– Section 34
– Section 379
– Section 406
– Section 420
Party
Abhishek Singh versus Ajay Kumar and others – Criminal Appeal No. SLP(Crl) No. 480 of 2025 – 2025 INSC 807 – 5th June 2025 – Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra.
