Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 592
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. OKA & ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.
Mrs. Shahnaj Taj. Mohd. Hashmi & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
Senior Inspector of Police & Anr. – Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO. 599 OF 2014
Decided On : 05-05-2017
For the Petitioner: Mr. Afroz A. Siddiqui
For the Respondent: Mr. S.K. Shinde, P.P. a/w. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP
Important Point - The allegations contained in the first information report even when taken at face value and accepted in entirety do not disclose any offence against these petitioners.
Headnote:Bombay Police Manual -Rules 218 and 219-Filing of final report.-Final report should contain all details for not sending accused for trial.
Filing of the final report is not an empty formality. Such report should contain all the details for not sending the accused for trial, as to enable the Magistrate to decide what course to adopt i.e. whether to accept the report and discharge the bonds or order further investigation or to take cognizance of the offence.
In the instant case, the report reveals that the concerned Investigating Officer/Officer-in-charge of the police station had not filled up all the required details pertaining to these petitioners and in fact, most of the columns have been left blank. The concerned Police Officer has also not disclosed the reasons for not sending the aforesaid petitioners for trial and has not made request to classify the case and issue and appropriate summaryviz. "A", "B" or "C" summary. Held that the final report is filed in a most cursory manner and is not in consonance with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code as well as he Rules under Bombay Police Manual.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 169, 170 and 173-Bombay Police Manual, Rules, 1951, Rules 218 and 219-Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 323, 448-A and 304-Filing of closure report by Police.-Closure report under Section 173 of Cr PC not filed in terms of Cr PC and Rules 218 and 219 of Manual not tenable.
It may be mentioned that filing of the Final Report is not an empty formality. Such report should contain all the details for not sending the accused for trial, as to enable the Magistrate to decide what course to adopt i.e. whether to accept the report and discharge the bonds or order further investigation or to take cognizance of the offence. In the instant case, the report reveals that the concerned Investigating Officer/Officer- in-charge of the police station had not filled up all the required details pertaining to these petitioners and in fact, most of the columns have been left blank. The concerned Police Officer has also not disclosed the reasons for not sending the aforesaid petitioners for trial and has not made request to classify the case and issue an appropriate summary viz. "A", "B" or "C" summary. The final report is filed in a most cursory manner and is not in consonance with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code as well as the Rules under Bombay Police Manual.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 323, 498-A and 504-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482-Harassment and cruelty.-FIR against married sisters of husband of victim, not disclosing any offence against them liable to be quashed.
Be that as it may, since the report is already filed before a Magistrate, it would be within the domain of the Magistrate to consider the said report and take a decision whether or not to accept the report filed against the petitioners, or send the case for further investigation or take cognizance of the offence under Section 190(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Nevertheless, the powers under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code are wide and can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law. In exercise of these powers Court has perused the FIR, which reveals that the petitioners are the married sisters of the husband of the first informant. The first information report does not contain any allegation against the petitioners. The allegations contained in the first information report, even when taken at face value and accepted in entirety, do not disclose any offence against these petitioners. In such circumstances, continuation of the proceedings emanating from the said FIR would be nothing but abuse of process of law.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Inherent powers under.—Inherent powers of Court under Section 482 of Cr PC can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law.
ANUJA PARABHUDESSAI, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties taken up for hearing.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "Cr.P.C.") the Petitioners have sought to quash the FIR No. 295 of 2013 registered against the Petitioners at Sakinaka Police Station for the offences under Section 498A, 323, 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The Respondent No.3/first informant was married to one Karam Husain Hashmi. The petitioners are the sisters of said Karam Husain Hashmi and the sisters-in-law of the Respondent No.3/first informant. The Respondent no.3 had lodged the afore stated FIR alleging that her husband Karam Husain Hashmi and his family members, including the Petitioners herein had been demanding dowry and subjected her to cruelty.
4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners has submitted that the allegations in the FIR taken at its face value do not disclose any offence against the petitioners. He submitted that continuation of this proceeding would amount to abuse of process of law.
5. The learned APP, upon instructions has submitted that the investigation in the subject FIR is already completed and the charge-sheet has been filed against the husband and the parents-in-law of the Respondent no.3/first informant. He has submitted that a closure report has been filed against the aforesaid Petitioners under Section 169 of Cr.P.C.
6. The grievance of the Petitioners would stand redressed with the statement that no charge sheet has been filed against them. Nevertheless, we deem it appropriate to consider the legality of submitting the closure report under Section 169 of Cr.P.C and the procedure adopted by the investigating agency.
7. In this regard, it would be necessary to refer to the relevant provisions contained in Chapter XIV of the Cr.P.C., which deals with registration of First Information Report and powers of the police to investigate the First Information Report.
Section 154 Cr.P.C imposes duty on the Officer-in-charge of the police station to record in writing the information relation to commission of a cognizable offence.
Section 155 Cr.P.C relates to the information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases.
Sub-Section (1) of Section 156 Cr.P.C. authorizes the police officer to investigate any cognizable case without the order of the Magistrate. Sub-Section (3) of Section 156 Cr.P.C. empowers the Magistrate to order such investigation.
Section 157 Cr.P.C prescribes the procedure for investigation. Sub-Section (1) of this Section mandates that whenever the police officer has reason to suspect that a cognizable offence has been committed he shall forthwith forward the report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence.
Sections 160 to 166 of the Cr.P.C. prescribe power and procedure of securing attendance of persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, recording and use of the statements of the witnesses, search, issuance of search warrants etc.
Section 167 Cr.P.C prescribes the procedure when the investigation of an offence cannot be completed within a period of 24 hours.
Section 169 Cr.P.C relates to the powers of the officer in charge of the concerned Police Station to release the accused person when the evidence is deficient. Whereas Section 170 Cr.P.C prescribes the procedure to be followed in cases to be sent to Magistrate when evidence is sufficient. Section 173 Cr.P.C contemplates filing of the report upon completion of investigation. These three Sections which are relevant to decide the issue read as under :
S. 169: Release of accused when evidence deficient. If, upon an investigation under this Chapter, it appears to the officer in charge of the police station that there is not sufficient evidence or reasonable ground of suspicion to justify the forwarding of the accused to a Magistrate, such officer shall, if such person is in cus
