Back
2024 Supreme(SC) 1344
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, JJ.
Satish Kumar Ravi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Jharkhand - Respondent
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9859/2023[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19-05-2023 in CRMP No. 325/2017 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi]
Decided on : 29-11-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ujjwal Singh, AOR, Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan, Adv., Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Adv., Mrs. Atefa Perwez, Adv., Mr. Abhishek Naik, Adv., Mrs. Gulafsha Qureshi, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv., Ms. Madhusmita Bora, AOR, Mr. Pawan Kishore Singh, Adv., Mr. Dipankar Singh, Adv., Mrs. Anupama Sharma, Adv., Ms. Pavithra V., Adv.
The court ruled that a directive allowing charge-sheets against accused under non-coercive orders is illegal, emphasizing the need for compliance with court orders.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Court - Legal principles regarding coercive action against accused - The court emphasized that an order prohibiting coercive action does not prevent the filing of a charge-sheet, but doing so may expose officers to contempt. (Paras 2 and 3)
Facts of the case:
The court reviewed affidavits from police officers regarding compliance with a prior order prohibiting coercive action against the petitioner.
Findings of Court:
The court found the directive in the police letter illegal and directed its modification.
Issues: The main issue was the legality of filing a charge-sheet against an accused under an order of non-coercive action.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while a non-coercive order exists, it does not prevent charge-sheet filing, but doing so may lead to contempt.
Result: Notice of contempt discharged.
Key Points: - The court held that a directive allowing charge-sheets against an accused under non-coercive orders is illegal and must be modified (!) . - An order prohibiting coercive action does not prevent filing a charge-sheet, but filing one in contravention may expose officers to contempt (!) , (!) . - The court directed modification of a letter dated 15th April, 2011 (ADGP, Jharkhand) that stated there was no prohibition on filing charge-sheets despite court orders (!) , (!) . - The directive in the police letter declaring no prohibition on filing charge-sheets despite no coercive action was deemed illegal, and the court directed its modification (!) . - The learned counsel for the State was directed to bring the observations to the attention of the ADGP and to modify the letter accordingly (!) . - The apology tendered by three officers was accepted and no further action was called for against them; the notice of contempt was discharged (!) . - Interim relief granted by the Court shall continue to operate (!) . - The hearing was listed for 17th January, 2025 (!) . - The affidavits of police officers stated compliance with the prior order directing no coercive action (!) . - The court’s finding identified the paragraph 3 of the 2011 letter as completely illegal (!) .
How to interpret a non-coercive order in relation to filing a charge-sheet against an accused?
What is the legality of filing a charge-sheet when there is a court order prohibiting coercive action?
What are the consequences for police officers who rely on a directive permitting charge-sheets despite an order not to take coercive action?
ORDER :
1. Perused the affidavit of Shri Deepak Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Shri Tarkeshwar Prasad Kesari, Investigating Officer and Shri Dayanand Kumar, Station House Officer. They have stated that they read the order of this Court which directed them not to take any further action against the petitioner as an order directing that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.
2. They have relied upon a letter dated 15th April, 2011 addressed by the Additional Director General of Police, Jharkhand to all Police Officers in the State. It is stated in the letter that even if court passes an order that no coercive action shall be taken as against the particular accused, there is no prohibition on filing charge-sheet against the accused. If a charge sheet is filed by relying upon clause 3 of letter dated 15th April, 2011 against an accused in whose favour there is an order directing not to take coercive action, the concerned officer will expose himself to contempt jurisdiction.
3. Therefore, what is stated in paragraph 3 of letter dated 15th April, 2011 is completely illegal. We direct the learned counsel appearing for the State to invite attention of the Additional Director General of Police to observations of this court. We expect him to immediately modify the letter dated 15th April, 2011.
4. The apology tendered by three officers is accepted and no further action is called for against them. Hence, notice of contempt is discharged.
5. List the petition for hearing on 17th January, 2025.
6. Interim relief granted by this Court shall continue to operate.
