Back
2023 Supreme(SC) 894
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. Shah, C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.
State of Uttarakhand – Appellant
Versus
Umesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. – Respondents
Petition(s) For Special Leave To Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5373- 5375 of 2020; IA No. 159155 of 2022 – Application For Permission; IA No. 159157 of 2022 – Exemption From Filing O.T.) With SLP(Crl) No. 6054-6056 of 2020 (Ii-B); (For Admission and I.R. and IA No. 123205 of 2020-Exemption From Filing C of C of the impugned judgment and IA No. 123206 of 2020-Exemption From Filing O.T.)
Decided On : 19-04-2023
Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Supriya Juneja, Advocate, Ms. A. Sahitya Veena, Advocate, Ms. Akhila Palem Ramireddy, Advocate, Mr. Ayush Kaushik, Advocate, Mr. Kaustubh Seth, Advocate, Mr. Balbir Singh Sr. Advocate,/A.S.G. Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Advocate, Ms. Namita Choudhary, Advocate, Ms. Srishti Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Arunabh Chowdhury, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Jayant Mohan, Advocate, Mr. Ankur Chawla, Advocate, Mr. Karan Kumar Gogna, Advocate, Mr. Amir Khan, Advocate, Mr. Akshay Sahni, Advocate, Mr. Pavan Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Anup Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Neha Jaiswal, Advocate, Mr. Shivam Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Shruti Singh, Advocate, Mr. Shubham Rajhans, Advocate and Ms. Pallavi Langar, Advocate, for the Appearing Parties.
Filing a closure report after quashing FIRs demonstrates non-application of mind and is not in accordance with Section 173 of the Cr.P.C.
Headnote:Closure Report - Criminal Proceedings - Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. - The court discussed the validity of a closure report filed by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) after the High Court had quashed the FIRs. The court emphasized that once the FIRs are quashed, there is no basis for filing a closure report and that such actions show a lack of application of mind on the part of the I.O. The court also highlighted that this practice should be discontinued and directed authorities to circulate its order to all police stations in the state.
Fact of the Case:
The Investigating Officer filed a closure report after the High Court had quashed the criminal proceedings/FIRs, leading to questions about its validity.Finding of the Court:
The court found that filing a closure report after the FIRs were quashed showed a lack of application of mind and was not in accordance with Section 173 of the Cr.P.C.Issues:
Validity of filing a closure report after quashing of FIRs, non-application of mind by Investigating Officer.Ratio Decidendi:
Once FIRs are quashed, there is no basis for filing a closure report; such actions demonstrate non-application of mind on the part of the Investigating Officer.Final Decision:
The court directed authorities to discontinue the practice and circulated its order to all police stations in the state.ORDER
1. When the matters were heard earlier, it was brought to our notice that, during the pendency of the present proceedings, the I.O. has filed a closure report. We are literally surprised and shocked that when the criminal proceedings/FIRs were quashed by the High Court, which has been challenged by the State thereafter, how there can be a closure report by the I.O. Therefore, this Court passed the following order on 28.03.2023.
'Learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that now a closure report has been filed by the I.O., as per the communication dated 08.01.2023.
On perusal of the communication, it appears that, as the matter before this Court is pending for more than two years, the I.O. has thought it fit to close the proceedings. Apart from the fact that the aforesaid can be said to be hardly a good ground to submit the closure report, merely because the proceedings are pending before this Court which are, as such, against the order passed by the High Court quashing the FIRs cannot be a ground to submit the closure report.
Even otherwise, once the FIRs are quashed by the High Court, which are the subject-matter of the present proceedings, there is no question of thereafter submitting any closure report when the FIRs itself have been quashed. It shows the absolute non-application of mind on the part of the concerned I.O.
Therefore, the matters are required to be heard on merits.
At the request of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the original writ petitioners-accused, put up on 19.04.2023 for final disposal.
On the next date of hearing, the concerned I.O. to explain his conduct to submit the closure report in a case where the FIRs are already quashed by the High Court, which are the subject matter of proceedings pending before this Court, by remaining personally present before this Court.'
2. It is reported that the concerned I.O. is present in the Court. An affidavit of the I.O. in compliance of the order dated 28.03.2023 has been filed. In the affidavit, it is stated that, though not required and not permissible, however as the proceedings were pending since last more than 2 years and in fact the proceedings were quashed by the High Court, the I.O. prepared the closure report and kept the same in the Police Station and was never forwarded to the learned Magistrate. It is submitted that the closure report, as such, was not on merits at all giving clean chit to the accused. It is submitted that as the proceedings were quashed by the High Court to complete the record and as per the practice prevailing in the State, the closure report was prepared and kept on the file in the P.S. without forwarding the same to the learned Magistrate.
3. Shri Balbir Singh, learned ASG, appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that apart from the fact that the ground on which the closure report was prepared and kept in the P.S., once the order of quashing the criminal proceedings was challenged by the State, the I.O. ought not to have even prepared the closure report. He has fairly conceded that once the criminal proceedings/FIRs are quashed, there cannot be any further closure report and and/or filing the closure report even in a case where the criminal proceedings/FIRs are quashed. The same is unknown to the procedure to be followed under the Cr.P.C. It is submitted that it was a bona fide/inadvertent error on the part of the I.O. even preparing the closure report and keeping it on the record of the file in the P.S. He has fairly conceded that such a closure report even prepared and kept on the file of the record cannot be said to be a valid closure report in the eye of law and it is to be ignored for all purposes. It is reported that even in the State such practice is being followed. Recording the statement of Shri Balbir Singh, learned ASG, appearing for the State that the closure report by the I.O. prepared and kept on record of the file is to be ignored for all purposes and cannot be said to be a closure report in acco
