SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Kumar, Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.
Mohammad Afzal Mohammad Sharif – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 3976 of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8494 of 2025)
Decided On : 11-09-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 154 – FIR – Once information relating to commission of a cognizable offence is given to officer-in-charge of a police station, investigative machinery is required to be set in motion – If information received revealed commission of a cognizable offence, it is mandatory to record substance of information in a book to be kept by officer in prescribed form – In effect, if information received disclosed commission of a cognizable offence, it is mandatory to register FIR – Appellant was subjected to assault during riots, requiring his hospitalization for his head injury – At the very least, assault upon him would have constituted offence under Sections 324 or 325 or 326 of IPC, which are all cognizable, and required decisive and prompt action on part of Police as soon as they came to know about it – When members of police force don their uniforms, they are required to shed their personal predilections and biases, be they religious, racial, casteist or otherwise – They must be true to call of duty attached to their office and their uniform with absolute and total integrity – In the case on hand, this did not happen – This is a fit case to direct Secretary, Home Ministry, Government of Maharashtra, to constitute a special investigation team, comprising senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities, to undertake investigation into all allegations made by appellant, by registering FIR. (Paras 16, 19, 23 and 24)
Facts of the case:
Complaint of the appellant before High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, was that police officers concerned had failed in their duty by not registering a first information report apropos attack and assault on him by four individuals on 13.05.2023. However, by order dated 25.07.2024, a Division Bench of High Court dismissed his writ petition, suspecting his bonafides. Hence, this appeal.
Findings of Court:
Secretary, Home Ministry, Government of Maharashtra, shall initiate appropriate disciplinary action against all erring police officials, in accordance with law and due procedure, for patent dereliction of duties. Measures shall also be initiated to instruct and sensitize rank and file in police department as to what law requires of them in discharge of their duties.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR, J
Leave granted.
2. Law requires, nay, ordains that its sentinels be vigilant, prompt and objective in enforcing and securing its mandate. To what extent the guardians of the law, viz., the police, discharge this task without bias and subjectivity is the question that arises in the case on hand. The complaint of the appellant before the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, was that the police officers concerned had failed in their duty by not registering a first information report apropos the attack and assault on him by four individuals on 13.05.2023. However, by order dated 25.07.2024, a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed his writ petition, suspecting his bonafides. Hence, this appeal.
3. At the outset we may note that, while reserving judgment in this matter on 19.08.2025, we permitted the learned counsel for the parties to file their written submissions, not exceeding three pages, within three days. However, the State of Maharashtra and its officials chose not to file their written submissions, even though three weeks have passed. To make up for their lapse, perhaps, the learned counsel for the appellant chose to file written submissions running into as many as eleven pages!
4. This litigation has its moorings in the communal riots that broke out in Akola City, Maharashtra, on 13.05.2023 owing to a social media post. In his writ petition filed before the High Court, the appellant stated that, while he was returning at about 10.30-11.00 PM on that day from Mominpura area in Akola to his residence at Ambika Nagar, he passed over Raj Rajeshwar Setu Bridge in Kholeshwar area and saw four unknown persons assaulting one person, who was in an auto rickshaw, with a sword, iron pipe, etc., and the person was screaming. Two of the four assailants accosted him and said that it was his turn next. The appellant claimed that the other two assailants pulled the injured person out of the auto rickshaw and hit him on the face with an iron pipe, whereupon he collapsed. The appellant stated that the four assailants then damaged his vehicle and assaulted him with their weapons on his head and neck. He stated that he fell unconscious on the road and was taken by two good samaritans to Akola Main Hospital. His father, thereafter, took him to Icon Multispecialty Hospital in Akola, where he underwent treatment.
5. The appellant claimed that, on the second day, the District Collector along with police personnel visited him at Icon Hospital and the police recorded his statement. He claimed to have given all details to them but no action was taken. The appellant asserted that he was an eyewitness to the murderous assault on the person in the auto rickshaw, whose name was revealed to him later as Vilas Mahadevrao Gaikwad. The appellant stated that ‘it was well within the knowledge of the people of Akola’ that the deceased was plying the auto rickshaw of a Muslim, which bore a sticker with the name ‘Garib Nawaz’. The appellant stated that under the mistaken identity/belief that the deceased was a Muslim, the four unknown assailants had caused his death and, thereafter, attacked him. The appellant stated that these facts were affirmed by none other than a leader of the Maharashtra Congress as well as an MLC of the Nationalist Congress Party, whom he named. The appellant claimed that, after waiting for considerable time and as no offence was registered against the unknown assailants, he along with his father lodged written complaints on 01.06.2023 with the Police Station Officer of the Old City Police Station at Akola, respondent No. 4 in the writ petition, and the Superintendent of Police, SP Office at Akola, viz., Sandip Ghuge, who was impleaded eo nomine as respondent No. 3 in the writ petition, but except for getting his statement recorded through one of the police personnel of the Old City Police Station at Akola, no other action was taken.
6. The appellant claimed that after a few days, during the festival of Shravan Somwa
FIR – If information received disclosed commission of a cognizable offence, it is mandatory to register FIR.
The police are mandated to register an FIR when information discloses a cognizable offense, without questioning the reliability of the information at that stage.
The police are mandated to register an FIR upon receiving information disclosing a cognizable offence, irrespective of the credibility of the information.
Prompt registration of an FIR is essential when directed by a magistrate under Cr.P.C. 156(3).
The High Court does not entertain a writ petition to compel FIR registration when alternative remedies under the Criminal Procedure Code are available, reinforcing the requirement for exhaustion of s....
The court established that the police cannot investigate a non-cognizable case or register an FIR based on the same facts without a Magistrate's permission, as mandated by Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.