Summary
The High Court had issued interim “no coercive steps” protections while disposing of petitions to quash FIRs, contrary to binding guidance on investigation-stage orders. The Supreme Court vacated those protections but left the pending quashing petitions for the High Court to decide on their merits.
Issues
- Whether the High Court could continue “no coercive steps” protection during investigation while disposing of or declining to entertain petitions to quash FIRs.
Provisions considered
- Sections 482, 438 and 173, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973A High Court should not routinely prohibit arrest or coercive steps while investigation is ongoing; an accused ordinarily must seek anticipatory bail from the competent court. (¶ 33.13-33.18)
- Article 226, Constitution of IndiaThe same restraint governing interim protection in petitions under Section 482 applies when the High Court acts under Article 226. (¶ 33.15-33.18)
Held
- A quashing court ordinarily assesses whether the FIR allegations disclose a cognizable offence, without deciding their reliability or merits while investigation is ongoing. Quashing and stays of investigation are exceptional and require judicial restraint. (¶ 33.1-33.15)
- A High Court should not routinely continue a “no arrest” or “no coercive steps” order during investigation or until a final report is filed. The accused should ordinarily seek anticipatory bail; an exceptional interim stay of investigation requires brief reasons, and any “no coercive steps” direction must be clarified. (¶ 33.16-33.18)
- The Court did not decide the merits of the pending FIR-quashing petitions, which remained for the High Court. (¶ 23-27)
Result
The appeals were allowed and the impugned interim orders were vacated. The High Court remained free to decide the pending quashing petitions on their merits.