Registration of FIR under section 497 IPC, found unconstitutional, deemed illegal; permission for investigating section 506 IPC required, thus highlighting the need for judicial discretion in FIR registration.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

The present petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C.") for quashing of FIR bearing No. 0419/2019 dated 03.10.2019 registered under sections 497/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the "IPC") at P.S. Dwarka.

2. The respondent no. 2 filed a complaint titled as Chetan Anand v Shaurya Shekhar and Another alongwith an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of FIR against the accused as named in the complaint bearing no. 29173/2018 for commission of offence punishable under sections 497/506/507 IPC. The Court of Shri Deepak Kumar-II, MM-06, South-West District, Dwarka, Delhi, vide order dated 24.09.2019, allowed the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The relevant portion of the order dated 24.09.2019 is reproduced as under:

Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I deem it appropriate that SHO PS Dwarka North be directed to investigate the allegations of the complainant after registration of FIR. It is needless to say, that it is the sole prerogative of the investigating agency to arrest the accused, however, investigating agency should not arrest the accused, unless there is sufficient grounds for his arrest. It is hereby clarified that merely the registration of FIR does not mean that the allegations of the complainant are true and correct, rather It has to pass a litmus test of investigation before ascertaining the veracity of the complaint. It has also been alleged that no action was taken local police. The SHO PS Dwarka North is not bound to register the case in accordance with the sections alleged by the complainant, rather he must exercise his discretion judiciously in invoking the relevant sections of IPC as per the facts alleged by the complainant In accordance with law.

3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 24.09.2019, preferred a revision petition bearing no. 463/2019 titled as Geetika Gulati v State under section 397 Cr.P.C. which was decided vide order dated 24.10.2019 by the Court of Shri Ajay Goel, Adidtional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS), Dwarka Courts. The relevant portion of the order dated 24.10.2019 is reproduced as under:

8. Before parting with one argument of Ld. Counsel for petitioner is to be addressed whereby he has argued that section 497 is not now made out as per directions of Hon'ble Supreme court. It is made clear that at this stage, this court is not commenting upon anything because FIR has been lodged and he has appropriate remedy, however, perusal of complaint and FIR show that the nanie of accused is ot mentioned in the FIR though names of alleged accused are mentioned in complaint as Shaurya Shekhar and Geetika Gulati. Further some allegations of taking away the material from the house by the Geetiak Gulati has also been mentioned. Threatening by accused No. 1 and 2 has also been mentioned. Name of one Neha Mathur Rastogi is also mentioned and so on. So in these circumstances, even if argument of Ld. Counsel qua Section 497 IPC is concerned still it is made out that some other accused and sections can be added in the FIR during the course of investigation and this court is not commenting upon anything. Rather, other aspects are also required to be seen in the matter by 10 and if circumstances warrants, he can add appropriate sections. This is not case where due to takin