End-to-end certification and regulatory compliance for Indian and global markets.
Some items must be certified before they get released mysteriously made for select goods like cables, switches, cement, gas cylinders, etc.
It ensures electronic products conform to Indian Standards (IS).Covers 70+ products including laptops, phones, adapters, TVs, and batteries.
Hallmarking Certification is mandatory in India for gold and silver jewellery.The BIS 916 Hallmark confirms 22K gold purity.Silver Hallmarking is compulsory for certain grades like BIS 925.
FMCS Mark Certification is a BIS-led approval process that enables foreign manufacturers to sell regulated products in the Indian market.
End-to-end certification and regulatory compliance for Indian and global markets.
End-to-end certification and regulatory compliance for Indian and global markets.
Quashing of FIR is a legal remedy under Indian legislation which permits higher courts to cancel or stay proceedings that began with a First Information Report which is frivolous, baseless, and/or malicious. Quashing of an FIR is effectively an order for the FIR to be deemed to have no effect or impact and for all related criminal proceedings to come to an end.
This remedy serves an important function in our justice system because it protects innocent people from harassment and protects the legal provisions from being used for ultra vires purposes. When someone is the victim of a false FIR i.e. of which there is no merit in the allegations, they can contact the appropriate court to quash the case rather than be subjected to long predicated on baseless, false charges.
Let’s consider a common scenario when business partners are involved in a commercial dispute over some payment or sale. One partner goes ahead and puts in the FIR for cheating or breach of trust for non-payment but it is clear that it is a civil contractual issue and not criminal at all. The accused can simply apply for a quashing of the FIR.
The statutory base for this legal remedy is found primarily in Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows the High Court to intervene under its inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of law or to secure the ends of justice.
The primary right to file a quashing petition belongs to the accused person against whom the FIR has been lodged. This makes sense because the accused is the one who faces potential harassment and legal consequences from a malicious or frivolous case. The law recognizes that the accused has the most direct interest in stopping proceedings that lack merit.
In certain circumstances, the Supreme Court can also entertain quashing petitions through Special Leave Petitions when the case involves broader legal questions or when there are exceptional circumstances that warrant the apex court’s intervention. This typically happens when the case has national importance or involves significant points of law that need clarification.
The restriction on who can file quashing petitions helps maintain focus on protecting those directly affected by malicious prosecutions while preventing misuse of the quashing process by parties who are not directly involved in the proceedings.
The authority to quash an FIR is well-through the Indian court system, where the High Court of the state in which the FIR was filed and the trial is pending has primary authority to hear applications to quash. This is sensible and practicable since the High Court will have a better understanding of the local law and local conditions, and can therefore review facts surrounding the case.
The Supreme Court, through Special Leave petitions under Articles 136 and 142 of the Constitution can quash FIRs, for example, where broader questions of law arise, or if there are exceptional circumstances. However, issues brought before the Supreme Court generally must have national importance or involve important questions of law that the High Court made their determination.
The selection of which forum to pursue depends on many factors, including the legal issues involved, urgency with respect to hearing, and whether there are wider questions beyond the parties’ established claim.
Section 482 of the CrPC provides the High Courts with certain powers of inherent jurisdiction to do whatever is necessary to prevent abuse of the process of law and to ensure the ends of justice are met. This language is purposefully broad because not every event can be anticipated by inflexible procedural rules that provide for the possibility of the courts intervening judicially to prevent an injustice from occurring.
In a petition for quashing an FIR, the court is concerned with the text of that FIR, as well as the context of the FIR, in determining whether there is a malafide intention or if a matter is frivolous in nature. The court does not conduct what would amount to a mini-trial, but opens the inquiry into whether there is an allegation that, even if taken at face value, would amount to a criminal offense under the law.
There are multiple recognized grounds you can utilize for quashing an FIR, which relates to the variety of situations where criminal proceedings are not warranted.
No Prima Facie Offense: Quashing of an FIR is appropriate when the allegations contained in the document do not establish a penal law offense under any legislation. For example, an FIR is filed in which the complainant alleges a breach of contract, but the facts outlined in the FIR are simply civil in nature and do not include an element of fraud or criminal breach of trust. The court might quash this FIR.
No Sufficient Factual or Legal Basis: In appropriate circumstances, an FIR can be quashed because there are insufficient facts or legal base to cover off the charge so as to amount to the basis for a criminal offense. For example, the facts in the FIR are simply either vague, contradictory, or do not provide sufficient coverage off the basic elements to support the charge.
Statutory Protection: An FIR can be quashed where statutory provisions permit the accused not to be subject to any legal proceedings. For example, the accused might have had protection under the legislation, or the statute of limitations has expired.
Counter FIR Evidence: If a counter FIR or evidential material is available which shows the original FIR was lodged with malafide intent to harass one of the parties this could be a good foundation for quashing. Property disputes are filled with these types of situations where parties file FIRs against each other, and counter FIR evidence may show the original FIR was in bad faith simply to harass the victim.
Civil Disputes Dressed as Criminal Cases: Courts are particularly watchful of civil or commercial disputes that are dressed as criminal cases. If the subject matter figure is an issue of breach of contract, summons for a dispute over property, or some type of breach of contract, but the litigant dresses it up as cheating or some breach of trust, these types of cases could be quashed.
Required Information:- • Complete FIR details (number, date, and police station)
• Information about the complainant and accused
• Present address and contact information for all parties
• Comprehensive details about FIR allegations
Essential Documentation:-
• Copy of the FIR and any related forms
• Evidence or other material to contradict the FIR allegations
• Witness statements or affidavits establishing their innocence
• Contractual documents, written communications, or other evidence determinate on the matter
• Any legal precedents supporting the grounds on which the petition seeks to be quashed
Requirements of the Pleading:-
• Detailed legal arguments establishing malafide intentions
• Evidence underscoring the frivolous nature of the accusations
• A definitive explanation of why the case lacks merit
• Incorporation and citation of relevant case law and statutes
Evaluating the Court’s Process:-
• The High Court will consider and evaluate all the facts and evidence submitted
• The High Court will assess issues on the basis of justice and merit
• The High Court will review the legal arguments and supporting documentation
• The High Court will either grant or deny the application for quashing
Interim Relief:-
• A court can order a stay of investigation in the quashing proceedings
• Grant protection from arrest when a quashing petition is pending
• Order stay of harassment while the case is assessed by the court
• Order interim recusal of measures against one/entity
Post-conviction quashing:-
• Usually for non-heinous crimes in special situations
• Usually where parties have a genuine compromise post-conviction
• Provided there is sufficient evidence of a miscarriage of justice
• Supreme Court will order in exceptional circumstances
Matrimonial cases and family disputes:-
• Common in section 498A (dowry harassment) cases
• Usually where families have come to a genuine reconciliation
• Section 406 (criminal breach of trust) disputes in family matters
• Court considers family relationship
Business and commercial disputes:-
• Issues relating to business partnerships presenting as criminal offences
• Civil disputes presented as cheating or fraud
• Property transactions – conflicted with civil nature
• Debt recovery matters that are lodged as criminal complaints.
Significance of Quashing the FIR system:-
The quashing of FIR protects innocent people from false or counterfeit criminal cases and gives high courts the authority to terminate cases where no prima facie case exists.
Major advantages:-
When Appropriate:-
• Parties have arrived at a real voluntary agreement
• Dispute resolution is in the interest of justice
• Continuation of prosection is meaningless
• Offense is something that can be compromised
Considerations by the Courts:-
• Whether the quashing process does in fact serve the ends of justice
• Nature of the allegations and their seriousness
• Genuineness of the compromise and the terms of settlement
• Impact on the public interest and law enforcement
Common Scenarios:-
• Matrimonial disputes under Section 498A IPC
• Domestic disputes that have led to a criminal complaint
• Commercial disputes between business partners • Family disputes over property
Aspects of Valid Compromise:-
• The settlement must be genuine and voluntary
• No reasonable person would find that there was coercion or undue pressure
• Fair settlement of the underlying dispute
• Parties are genuinely reconciled and are satisfied with the outcome
Recent Supreme Court and High Court decisions have stressed that the criminal justice system should not be used as a means to recover debt or settle contractual disputes.
Courts have also shown more willingness to quash matrimonial cases when the couple has completely reconciled, realizing that forcing these cases to trial achieves nothing and detracts from the family processes that have been repaired.
The judiciary stakeholders have developed more nuanced ways of assessing compromise settlements while ensuring that they are genuine and fair while taking measures to prevent powerful parties from dodging justice through pressure or undue influence over a complainant.
Anyone who is thinking about making a quashing petition should be aware that success will be directly related to the expertise of the lawyer and strength of the case they present to the court. Courts carefully scrutinize these petitions and will not quash an FIR simply because someone believes there is no basis to it.
The best time to seek quashing is typically immediately after its registration (before any substantial investigation is conducted or charges framed).
Affidavits and supporting evidence must be thorough and firm. Courts need to see a clear and credible case disclosing the FIR lacks merit beyond simple, formal statements. Witness accounts, expert opinions and documentary evidence can all play a critical role in establishing a legitimate case for quashing the FIR.
Legal Financial costs are also concerned regarding quashing proceedings, as they generally require experienced criminal lawyers and likely multiple appearances in courts. However, these costs are generally negligible compared to the cost and harassment one can deal with by allowing the POLICE to proceed with the baseless written case against you.
The ability to quash FIRs is one of the most significant protections against the abuse of the criminal law in India. This remedy recognizes that although criminal law serves an important function in social order, it can be abused by people using the law as a weapon to harass or gain an unfair advantage in a personal dispute.
Knowing when to, and how to effectively quash an FIR can be of utmost importance to individuals who have been wrongfully accused, or who find themselves in a situation where an FIR has been filed against them erroneously. Similar to obtaining a bail order, a quashing of an FIR requires some strategic thinking regarding the law, appropriate documentation, and competent representation, but it provides a vital safeguard for innocent parties.
For the legal system to operate properly, it is necessary to have safeguards against the abuse of the legal system and for victim parties to access justice. The quashing of FIR process recognizes this balance by allowing courts to scrutinize the worthiness of criminal allegations at the outset, protecting both individual rights at the same time maintaining the integrity of the judicial system.
A legal remedy which permits the Court to cancel or stay the proceedings of a frivolous or a malevolent FIR.
Only a person accused in the FIR may apply to the High Court to quash the FIR.
The High Court under Section 482 CrPC, and the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petitions under Articles 136 and 142.
FIRs may be quashed on the grounds of frivolity, malicious, the absence of prima facie offense or if there exists a counter FIR evidencing malafide intentions.
Yes, provided the conviction is not heinous and/or the parties settle.
Yes, if FIRs are filed under section 498A or 406 IPC, settled amicably, and/or compromise reached.
To grant the High Court inherent powers to intervene to protect against misuse of the law and illegal conduct against individuals.
Yes, courts can quash FIRs as long as both parties resolve the issues amicably, especially when it is a minor or civil-related incident.
It protects people from harassment, it protects the reputation of the person, and it may prevent unnecessary litigation while reducing the burden on the court.