The main legal point established in the judgment is that the offence under Section 195A IPC is cognizable, and both a complaint and an FIR can be entertained for such offences.

Mukta Gupta, J.

1. Petitioner by the present petition seeks quashing of FIR No.310/2015 under Sections 195A, 506, 34 IPC registered at PS Najafgarh, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 herein.

2. Contents of FIR No. 310/2015 are as under:

“It is stated that I reside at the above-noted address along with my family. On 02.02.2015, FIR No. 88/2015 was registered upon my complaint against Rahul S/o Shri Bhagatram who had threatened me either to withdraw my complaint or else he would kill me and my family. That on 16.04.2015, at around 9:45 PM, when I was at my residence along with my family, someone knocked at the door. When my father opened the door, two persons asked him to come out to have a word with him. My father went out with them and after walking a little distance, two more persons joined them and one of them asked my father to advice his daughter that whatever case she has filed against Rahul be withdrawn else you and your family members will have to bear dire consequences and pushed me aside while leaving. In the meanwhile, my other family members reached there and called up 100 no. In order to have the case withdrawn against him, Rahul has threatened me and my family through his friends. Appropriate legal action may be initiated against th8em. I can identify them when brought in my presence.”

3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is two-fold, firstly that no FIR could have been registered by the State for offences punishable under Section 195A/506 IPC for the reason Section 506 IPC is non-cognizable and even if Section 195A IPC is a cognizable offence, the amendment brought in the Cr.P.C. by introducing Section 195A mandates that only a complaint could be filed for the said offence, thus no FIR could be registered. ‘Complaint’ as defined under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. excludes a Police report. The second argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that even on the facts as stated in the FIR, offence under Section 195A IPC is not made out for the reason the threat given to the complainant was to withdraw the case and not to give false evidence. To press his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Section 191 IPC which defines giving false evidence, 192 IPC which defines fabricating false evidence and Section 193 IPC which provides for punishment for false evidence.

4. When the present petition came up for hearing, this Court deprecated the non-action on the part of the Police officers and directed the Commissioner of Police to conduct vigilance inquiry and submit a report. During the course of vigilance inquiry it was found out that there was dereliction/negligence on the part of two investigating officers i.e. ASI Krishan Chand and SI Hawa Singh and thus departmental inquiry was initiated against them. It was informed to the Court that simultaneously investigation has been transferred to DIU, Outer District Delhi. Despite the investigation having been transferred to DIU Outer District as per the status report a final report was filed by the SHO PS Najafgarh that no evidence came forward seeking closure of the case for lack of evidence.

5. On the status report filed by the SHO, PS Najafgarh this Court raised a query to the learned Standing Counsel for the State as to once investigation has been transferred to DIU Outer District, how the SHO concerned filed the final report noting ‘Not charge-sheeted for want of evidence’ and that till date before this Court no status report has been filed by DIU Outer District.

6. A detailed status report has been filed by Additional DCP Dwarka District. According to the Additional DCP Dwarka District after the vigilance inquiry was conducted by PHQ pursuant to direction of this Court, the DCP Outer District transferred investigation of FIR No.310/2015 from PS Najafgarh to DIU Outer District and the order was circulated to the concerned officers. However, it never reached SHO Najafgarh in which regard the diary register of SHO Najafgarh has been