Yes. If someone files an FIR many years after already filing a civil suit on the same facts, and cannot explain the delay, the High Court can quash that FIR as an abuse of process. The Supreme Court confirmed this in Nazibul Rahim Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2026 INSC 619, where it quashed an FIR lodged 23 years after the civil suit.
If you are short on time, jump to the section “How to get a delayed or retaliatory FIR quashed” below. It tells you the exact route under Section 528 BNSS.
A delayed criminal complaint, filed long after a civil case on the same dispute, is one of the most common pressure tactics in Indian property and family fights. On 25 March 2026, the Supreme Court drew a clear line against it. Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan held that a person can use both civil and criminal remedies for the same wrong, but not after an unexplained, inordinate gap that exposes a bad motive.
The dispute was over roughly 13 acres of farmland in Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh. The complainant said the land was transferred using a forged Power of Attorney signed by an impersonator. The catch was timing: the complainant had already gone to civil court in 2001, but waited until 2024 to file the FIR.
| Year | What happened |
|---|---|
| 2001 | Complainant files a civil suit over the same land. He clearly knew of the alleged forgery from this point. |
| 2024 | FIR No. 172 of 2024 is lodged, about 23 years after the civil suit. |
| 03.05.2024 | Police file the chargesheet. |
| 09.08.2024 | The trial court passes the cognizance order. |
| 25 March 2026 | Supreme Court quashes the FIR, chargesheet, and cognizance order. |
Ask these questions in order. The more “yes” answers, the stronger your case to quash.
If the answers line up, the High Court can step in under its inherent power and quash the FIR.
The Supreme Court did not say criminal and civil remedies cannot run together. They can. A person wronged by a forged document or a fraudulent transfer may sue for civil relief and also report a crime. That is settled.
What the Court added is a timing test. There must not be an unreasonable or inordinate gap between starting the two proceedings. A criminal case launched after a long, unexplained delay, especially when a civil suit on the same facts was filed much earlier, raises serious doubt about whether the complaint is genuine. Such an FIR can be quashed as an abuse of the legal process.
The power to quash sits with the High Court. It uses its inherent power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, which replaced Section 482 CrPC, and its writ power under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed FIR No. 172 of 2024 along with the chargesheet dated 03.05.2024 and the cognizance order dated 09.08.2024.
You cannot ask the police to cancel an FIR once it is registered. You must go to the High Court. Here is the route.
If the FIR is quashed, the criminal case ends. The civil suit, if any, continues on its own track.
Ramesh, a farmer in a small town, bought land in 2005. In 2006 the seller's relative filed a civil suit claiming the sale deed was forged. The suit dragged on for years. In 2024, with the civil case still pending, the same relative suddenly filed an FIR for forgery and cheating against Ramesh, then offered to “settle everything” if Ramesh paid him.
Ramesh did not panic. He collected the 2006 civil suit papers, drew up a timeline showing an 18-year gap, and filed a quashing petition in the High Court under Section 528 BNSS. He argued that the dispute was civil, that the complainant knew the facts since 2006, and that the late FIR was a pressure tactic. Relying on the 2026 Supreme Court ruling, the High Court quashed the FIR. The civil suit carried on, where the title question rightly belongs.
This is a generic illustration, not a real case.
Delay alone is usually not enough. It becomes powerful when joined with a parallel civil suit on the same facts and a dispute that is civil at heart. In Nazibul Rahim Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2026 INSC 619, the 23-year gap plus the earlier civil suit together showed the FIR was an abuse of process.
The High Court. It uses its inherent power under Section 528 BNSS, which replaced Section 482 CrPC, and its writ power under Article 226 of the Constitution. The police and the trial court cannot quash an FIR. You must file a petition in the High Court.
Yes. The Supreme Court confirmed a person can use both civil and criminal remedies for the same wrong. The limit is timing. There must not be an unreasonable, unexplained gap between starting the two, especially if the civil suit came first.
You can still seek quashing. In the 2026 case, the Supreme Court quashed the FIR along with the chargesheet dated 03.05.2024 and the cognizance order dated 09.08.2024. Acting earlier is better, but a filed chargesheet does not close the door.
No. The criminal case and the civil suit run on separate tracks. Quashing the FIR ends the criminal proceeding only. The civil suit on the property or title continues and is decided on its own.
Ask the High Court for a stay on the proceedings or on arrest when you file the quashing petition. You can also apply for anticipatory bail separately if you fear arrest. Speak to a criminal lawyer about both options at once.
The case arose from a property dispute, but the principle is broader. Any criminal complaint filed after an unexplained, inordinate delay, especially where a civil case on the same facts came first, can be tested for abuse of process. Family and money disputes often fit this pattern.
<!– earn-index-20260701b –>