IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
Apurva Ghiy - Appellants
Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition (Cr.) No. 310 of 2020
Decided On : 07-10-2020
FIR - Offence under Section 188 of the IPC - Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which bars the cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. The court highlighted the mandatory nature of this provision and its purpose to protect innocent persons from criminal prosecution activated by malice or ill will. The judgment referenced various Supreme Court and High Court decisions to emphasize the mandatory nature of Section 195(1)(a)(i) and the consequences of non-compliance, ultimately leading to the quashing of the FIR for the offence under Section 188 of the IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a medical graduate, sought quashment of an FIR registered against her for not informing the Chief Municipal Officer about her arrival from New Delhi, as mandated by an order dated 18-5-2020. She argued that the FIR was not valid as per Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and that the order was not duly promulgated. The State contended that the FIR was rightly lodged as the petitioner failed to inform the Chief Municipal Officer as per the notification.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that no FIR can be registered under Section 154 of the Code for the offence under Section 188 of the IPC due to the mandatory nature of Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code. It quashed the FIR based on the legal analysis and discussion, citing the decision of the Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal's case.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR for the offence under Section 188 of the IPC could be registered under Section 154 of the Code, and whether the order dated 18-5-2020 was duly promulgated.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the mandatory nature of Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code, which prohibits the cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of the IPC except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. It cited various judgments to support its finding and highlighted the consequences of non-compliance with this provision.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR for the offence under Section 188 of the IPC.
ORDER :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up for final hearing through video conferencing.
2. The petitioner is a young medical graduate. She after passing her graduate examination (MBBS), decided to prepare for civil services examination and was staying at New Delhi since last few months and meanwhile, in March, 2019, COVID-19 stepped-in followed by countrywide lock-down and closure of transport facility and she was strained at New Delhi. When the position eased, she applied for issuance of E-pass for travelling from New Delhi to the State of Chhattisgarh to her home town situated at Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon and accordingly, she was granted E-pass by the State of Chhattisgarh. She reached Rajnandgaon on 7-6-2020 and next day, she got herself examined at Community Health Centre, Ambagarh Chowki and also informed the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Rajnandgaon on 10-6-2020 about her arrival, but she failed to inform to the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Ambagarh Chowki-respondent No. 3 herein, about her arrival from New Delhi that she came from other State as required by the order dated 18-5-2020 passed by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon and thereafter, she was also tested Corona positive pursuant to which on 18-6-2020, respondent No. 3-Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Ambagarh Chowki, lodged first information report (FIR) at Police Station: Ambagarh Chowki informing that though she reached from New Delhi to Ambagarh Chowki, Distt. Rajnandgaon, on 7-6-2020, but she did not inform the same as mandated by the Collector and she has been tested Corona positive and she has been admitted in the hospital, as such, offence under Section 188 of the IPC be registered against her and therefore action be taken against her pursuant to which FIR No. 112/2020 dated 18-6-2020 has been registered by Police Station: Ambagarh Chowki for offence under Section 188 of the IPC which is sought to be quashed in this writ petition by the petitioner herein.
3. The petitioner seeks quashment of above-stated FIR principally on the ground that by virtue of the provision contained in Section 195(1)(a)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code'), for offence under Section 188 of the IPC, no cognizance can be taken by the Magistrate unless complaint in writing is made by the public servant concerned and therefore police cannot register FIR under Section 154 of the Code and investigate the case and thereafter, file complaint, as such, since cognizance of the offence can be taken in a particular manner on a complaint filed by the public servant, cognizance of the offence under Section 188 of the IPC on the police report is absolutely barred and therefore no FIR under Section 154 of the Code can be registered for offence punishable under Section 188 of the IPC. It has also been pleaded that the order dated 18-5-2020 was never promulgated by the Collector in the official gazette or by beat of drum, therefore, she did not have information about the same and as such she could not inform the Collector about her arrival though she herself submitted her for medical examination on the next day of her arrival, on 8-6-2020 which is apparent from the documents Annexures P-3 & P-5, however, it is a pure and simple technical error and the State is having complete information as she came from Delhi to Rajnandgaon after E-pass having been granted by the State Government, therefore, for technical omission of not informing to the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Ambagarh Chowki who is an officer subordinate to the State Government/District Collector, it cannot be held that she has omitted to comply the order dated 18-5-2020 issued by the Collector. Even otherwise, respondent No. 3 Chief Municipal Officer being subordinate to the Collector cannot make report/lodge FIR for offence under Section 188 of the IPC, as such, the FIR deserves to be quashed in the light of the
Lalji Haridas v. The State of Maharashtra and another
Basir-ul-Huq and others v. The State of West Bengal on the complaint of Dhirendra Nath Bera
Govind Mehta v. The State of Bihar
C. Muniappan and others v. State of Tamil Nadu
Babita Lila and another v. Union of India
Sachida Nand Singh v. State of Bihar (1998) 2 SCC 493
State of U.P. v. Mata Bhikh and others
M.S. Ahlawat v. State of Haryana and another
Jeewan Kumar Raut and another v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Ramesh Chandra Mehta v. State of W.B.
Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India
Saloni Arora v. State of NCT of Delhi
Jeevanandham and others v. State and another
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal
Ushaben v. Kishorbhai Chunilal Talpada and others
Chittaranjan Das v. State of West Bengal and others
Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others (2014) 2 SCC 1
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.