Patna High Court
Kailash RamversusThe State of Bihar through Addl. Director General Special Vigilance Unit, Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The application for quashing the FIR is premature and is therefore dismissed.
Summary
Petitioners Kailash Ram and Syed Fazle Rahman filed an application seeking quash of an FIR registered by the Special Vigilance Unit for alleged offences under Sections 318, 316(5) and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections 12, 13(2) and 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. They contended that the FIR lacked the essential ingredients of the offences, was based on the complainant's imagination, and was filed without supporting evidence, amounting to abuse of process. The Vigilance Department argued that the investigation was still ongoing and that the petition was premature. The Court held that the application was indeed premature, as the investigation had not yet concluded, and that quashing the FIR at this stage would be contrary to Supreme Court precedent. Consequently, the application was disposed of, with liberty to approach the Court after the investigation is completed.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR can be quashed at the pre‑investigation stage.
- Whether the FIR discloses sufficient ingredients of the offences under the cited provisions of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- Whether permitting a premature quash order would contravene established Supreme Court jurisprudence on the investigation process.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 316(5), 318, 61
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — s. 12, 13(1)(b), 13(2)
Subjects
- quash of FIR
- preliminary investigation
- abuse of process
- vigilance
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Prevention of Corruption Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74362 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna
======================================================
1. Kailash Ram Son of Doodhnath Ram Resident of 117, Chak Harihar Ban
Jhunsi, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh - 211019
2. Syed Fazle Rahman Son of Syed Abdul Ali Resident of Flat No. G.D. Alba
Enclave, Alba Colony, Phulwari Sharif, Patna - 801505
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Addl. Director General Special Vigilance Unit,
Patna Bihar
2. The Addl. Director General, Special Vigilance Unit, Patna Bihar
3. Rohit Kumar Son of Santosh Kumar Suman Resident of Ward No. 3
Dhabahi, P.S. - Laukahi, District - Madhubani, Bihar - 847108
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Sunit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the S.V.U. : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Law Officer, S.V.U.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-01-2026
Heard Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, learned Advocate
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Rana Vikram Singh,
learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Vigilance
Department.
2. The instant application has been filed for quashing of
the entire proceeding of the F.I.R. bearing Special Vigilance Unit
Case No. 04 of 2024 dated 04.09.2024 registered for offences
under Sections 318, 316(5) and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74362 of 2024 dt.12-01-2026
2/4
read with Sections12, 13(2) and 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended 2018).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners have prayed for quashing of the FIR on the ground that
the FIR does not contain any ingredients of the offences under
Section 318 of BNS, Section 316(5) of BNS and Section 61 of
BNS against them. It has been submitted that the FIR is based on
the figment of imagination of the complainant and despite the fact
that the previous complaints lodged by the present complainant,
Rohit Kumar in the Governor’s Secretariat, Bihar, Lok Bhawan,
Patna and with the Education Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna were found to be not tenable and, in fact, the then Registrar
of the Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga had informed
the Governor’s Secretariat at Lok Bhawan, Patna about the illegal
activities of the complainant, Rohit Kumar, who was resorting to
extortion and blackmailing. The Registrar had sought permission
to register a case against Rohit Kumar for his criminal behaviour
and in response to such request the Governor’s Secretariat had
authorized the University administration to file a case against
Rohit Kumar before the competent authority.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga has been singled out
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74362 of 2024 dt.12-01-2026
3/4
and FIR has been lodged without any supporting material/evidence
and, therefore, the registration of such case amounts to abuse of
the process of law.
5. It has been thus prayed that in view of the fact that the
allegations lack any specific details and there being no evidence to
establish clear culpability for legal action against the individuals
involved, the continuation of trial on basis of such FIR would
amount to an abuse of the process of law.
6. Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Vigilance department has submitted that the present
application is premature and after lodging of the FIR on
04.09.2024, the investigation in the matter is still in progress and
no finding has been arrived as yet and therefore, the present
application for quashing of the FIR at such an early stage is
completely misconceived and may not be entertained. It has been
submitted that till date the department of Vigilance has not
initiated any coercive action against any of the authorities of the
University and they are practically investigating the allegations
levelled in the FIR and till date the requirement of the petitioner
has not arrived. It has also been submitted that if the petitioners are
ready to assist the investigating officer during the course of the
investigation and responds to any summon in order to give a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74362 of 2024 dt.12-01-2026
4/4
statement or otherwise, the department of Vigilance shall not be
taking any coercive action against them, if the petitioners make
themselves available and support in the investigation, as and when
required.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing on
behalf of the parties, this Court finds that the present application
has been filed for quashing of the FIR and the investigation of the
same is still pending. This Court finds the application to be
premature and at this stage passing any order prior to the
culmination of the investigation would not be proper and against
the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
8. In view of the above, this application is disposed of
with a liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court at an
appropriate stage, as advised, only after the Vigilance authorities
completes the investigation and submit its report.
9. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid
observations.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 13.01.2026
Transmission Date 13.01.2026
Checking your session…