WHETHER ABUSE OF PROCESS IS INVOLVED IN THE ARREST OF SUMALI AND FILING

OF F.I.R.?
It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that no abuse of process is involved in the arrest of
Sumali and filing F.I.R.
(1)PRELIMINARY OBJECTION:
Yourlordship the counsel seeks to submit that the case of appellant is under Article 133 of the
Constitution of India. Article 133 of the Constitution reads as:
133. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in regard to civil
matters
(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order in a
civil proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India if the High Court certifies under
Article 134A
(a) that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance; and
(b) that in the opinion of the High Court the said question needs to be decided by the
Supreme Court
(2)Notwithstanding anything in Article 132, any party appealing to the Supreme Court under
clause ( 1 ) may urge as one of the grounds in such appeal that a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of this Constitution has been wrongly decided
(3)Notwithstanding anything in this article, no appeal shall, unless Parliament by law
otherwise provides, lie to the Supreme Court from the judgment, decree or final order of one
Judge of a High Court.
It is pertinent to note here that under Article 133 of the Constitution of India only civil
matters can be brought to the Supreme Court. Civil Matters refers to .......here add abt civil
matters which u were telling me yesterday....... However, the matter relating to quashing of
F.I.R. Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not covered under the ambit of 'civil proceedings' and
therefore it is not maintainable.
(2) Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled in Delhi Muncipality v. Ram Kishan1
that when prima facie from the allegations contained in F.I.R.the offense against the accused
is made out, the inherent power of High Court under Section 482 should not be exercised. In
the instant case, the accused has been charged under Section 505 of I.P.C.read with Section
66A of Information Technology Act,2000. Under these provisions, the accused has been
charged because of the comments entered by her on her Facebook Account which has a
tendency to incite the two groups namely India Rationals and the followers of Acharya Sukh
Dev. A prima facie offense is committed by the accused and because of which the HC shall
not exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
(3) Further, it is settled law that the power to quash FIR must be exercised very sparingly and
with circumspection. It must be exercised in rarest of rare cases2.
(4) Furthermore, it is also settled in the case of Narender Kumar v. State (N.C.T) Delhi3 that
F.I.R.disclosing an offense which is non-compoundable cannot be quashed under Section
482 Cr.P.C. In the instant case, the accused Sumali has been charged under Section 505 of
I.P.C.which is a non-compoundable offense and so the F.I.R.cannot be quashed.
1 AIR 1983 SC 67
2 M. Narayandas v. State of Karnataka 2004(1)CRJ 386 SC
3 2002 Cri LJ NOC 14

It is therefore, humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Supreme Court that no abuse of process is
involved in the arrest of Sumali and filing F.I.R.and the accused has been rightly arrested and the
F.I.R.cannot be quashed in the instant case.