JUDGMENT

Mukul Mudgal, J.—The trial court had delivered the impugned judgment dated 13th December, 2006 by which the accused SHO, R.P. Tyagi along with Sub-Inspector Tej Singh and Inspector K.P. Singh were convicted. The appellant in the present appeal Inspector K.P. Singh was convicted under Section 217 IPC by judgment and order dated 13th December, 2006 and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment as well as fine of Rs.25,000, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “trial court”) on the ground that there was a 5-1/2 months delay in registering the FIR.

2. As per the facts of the case in the intervening night of 24th and 25th August 1987, two persons Mahender and Ram Kumar were admitted in SDN hospital having sustained injuries ostensibly due to beatings. Mahender was shifted to LNJPN hospital where he died at about 2.00 pm on 25th August 1987. As it appeared an unnatural death, area SDM S.S. Rathore conducted inquest proceedings and found involvement of the police in the crime and recommended registration of FIR on 26th August 1987 against the police of PS Vivek Vihar for offence under Section 304 IPC. Shri S.S. Rathore, SDM was then subsequently transferred from the post of SDM. Shri Parimal Rai, the next SDM submitted his report and after recording statements of several witnesses. Shri Parimal Rai did not agree with his predecessor SDM and reached a conclusion in his inquest report that Mahender Kumar had sustained injuries on being beaten by the public. Though the FIR about this happening was registered by the accused K.P. Singh himself being FIR No.59/88 but this was done only when the order of the Lt. Governor of Delhi, was communicated through the Deputy Commissioner, Delhi. This FIR was registered on 11th February 1988 while Mahender Kumar died on 25th August 1987. Thus, there was a delay of 5½ months in the registration of the FIR.

3. The main plea of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Manmohan is that there were no documents to show that the order of the superior officer was addressed to and served upon the appellant for the registration of the FIR. Though the appellant was charged under Section 218 IPC for preparing false documents with the intent to save the accused but conviction was only recorded under Section 217 IPC which was for 5-1/2 months’ delay in registration of FIR.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant in order to strengthen the aforementioned plea submitted as under:

(a) The letter dated 28th August, 1987 was not addressed to the SHO, Vivek Vihar whereby directions appear to have been issued by the then SDM, Shahdara Mr. S.S. Rathore to the SHO, Police Station Shahdara, to register an FIR. The said letter was never received by the appellant and the same was endorsed only to the DCP (East).

(b) It is contended that on 29th September, 1987, the Lt. Governor, Delhi issued a direction to the DCP (HQ) to register a criminal case against the concerned errant police officers. However, a copy of the same was not marked to the appellant though it was marked to DCP (East). It is further submitted that appellant was not aware of the letter dated 3rd November, 1987 though it was recorded in the said letter of DCP (East) to DC(Delhi) that SHO, Vivek Vihar contacted SDM, Shahdara to collect statements and documents to proceed further in the matter but he could not get those documents.

(c) By a letter dated 15th January, 1988 addressed to the DCP (Hqrs), the DCP (East) has stated thereafter the matter was discussed with Legal Adviser to CP who was of the opinion that further action should be taken on receipt of Inquest Report, which is an important document since inquest was conducted by SDM, which is a semi-judicial body. On 10th February, 1988, the DCP received second report of the SDM and on 11th February, 1988, an FIR was filed by the appellant but DCP (East) directed investigation by ACP, Gandhi Nagar, who on 7th July, 1989 filed the report a