Delhi HC quashes attempt to murder FIR against academician Madhu Kishwar

The Delhi High Court has quashed a 17-year-old attempt to murder case against academician Madhu Kishwar, noting that the FIR was a maliciously motivated counter blast for wreaking vengeance.

The high court said setting the criminal law machinery in motion only for the reason that the complaint discloses commission of cognisable offence would be an abuse of the process of the court.

“Even if the allegations of the complainant are taken at the highest, considering the complainant's conviction in a case arising out of same incident, the same can at best be considered as a self-defence or an altercation at the stage when the complainant has formed an unlawful assemble and caused injuries to the petitioner (Kishwar) and another person when they were carrying out certain functions assigned to them,” Justice Amit Mahajan said in an order passed on October 16.

The high court passed the order while allowing a petition by Kishwar seeking quashing of an FIR lodged against her in June 2008 for the alleged offences of attempt to murder, voluntarily causing hurt and criminal intimidation under the erstwhile Indian Penal Code.

The FIR related to an altercation that took place between the complainant's family and Kishwar on December 31, 2007.

The complainant had accused Kishwar of instructing her driver to run over her and her family members with a car during a dispute over the alleged allotment of shops in Sewa Nagar Market in Kotla Mubarakpur area here.

It was also alleged that Kishwar and her associates assaulted the complainant and her family members, causing serious injuries.

The petitioner's counsel, however, claimed that the FIR was a counter blast to an FIR lodged by her against the complainant.

It was submitted by Kishwar's counsel that she was authorised to monitor civil discipline in the area concerned and to report about the unauthorised construction. It was stated that a certain area had been taken over illegally by a gang which was allegedly headed by the complainant's son due to which she had a vested interest against the petitioner.

The counsel said when Kishwar and some volunteers started clicking photographs in the market, the complainant and her family members started a fight and assaulted the petitioner and her driver.

The high court noted that the complainant in this case has already been convicted by the trial court in the FIR lodged by Kishwar.

“The judgment passed by the trial court in the case arising out of FIR … clearly indicates that respondent no.4 along with other accused persons therein had formed an unlawful assembly with the purpose of stopping the petitioner from clicking photographs and given beatings to the petitioner as well as Sheeshpal (driver), for which the complainant was ultimately convicted,” it said.

It added, “The subject FIR appears to be in the nature of defence and a maliciously motivated counter blast to FIR … for wreaking vengeance upon the petitioner. Both the FIRs pertain to the incident that took place on December 31, 2007, and the conviction of respondent no.4 in relation to her conduct on the said date appears to have attained finality”.