Point of Law:
It is not necessary that the offender should intend to produce harm, or contemplate his disobedience as likely to produce harm. It is sufficient that he knows of the order which he disobeys, and that his disobedience produces, or is likely to produce, harm.

JUDGMENT :

A.C. RAO, J.

1. The present applications have been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) for quashing and setting aside the FIRs dated 18.05.2015 lodged by the respondent No. 2-original complainant being II-C.R. No. 12 of 2015 and II-C.R. No. 13 of 2015 respectively registered before Salaya Marine Police Station, Devbhumi Dwarka, for the offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”). Since both the applications arise out of the common offence, the same are heard and decided analogously by a common judgment.

2. It is alleged by the respondent No. 2-original complainant, who is a police constable, in the FIR that on 18.05.2015, when the complainant and other police staff were on petrolling duty, they found labourers from other state working as a daily wager and they had not informed the police as per the notification of the Additional District Magistrate, Devbhumi Dwarka, being notification No. DM/DCH/ON/182/2015 dated 30.03.2015 and thereby committed the alleged offence.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Dipak Sindhi, appearing on behalf of the applicants in both the applications, has contended that the FIR against the applicants is a gross misuse and abuse of the process of law. He has further contended that as per Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. proceedings under Section 188 of the IPC can only be initiated on the basis of a complaint in writing of the public servant concerned made to the Court or to some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Section 195(1) of the Cr.P.C. restrains the Court from taking cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 188 of the IPC unless a complaint in writing is made to it by the public servant concerned. In other words, no FIR can be registered by the police. It would not be open for the police to register a case against the offender for the offence under Section 188 of the IPC and then to submit a report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. to the concerned Court.

3.1 In this regard, the learned advocate for the applicants has relied on the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Jiwan Kumar vs. State of Punjab and Others, (2008) Cri. L.J. 3576, wherein it is held as under:

“8. Coming to the attack of the petitioner in regard to the registration of the FIR, it may be noticed that proceedings under Section 188 IPC can only be initiated on the basis of a complaint in writing of the public servant concerned made to the court or to some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Section 195(1) of the Code restrains the court from taking cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 188 IPC unless a complaint in writing is made to it by the public servant concerned. In other words, no FIR can be registered by the police. It would not be open to the police to register a case against the offender for offence under Section 188 IPC and then to submit a report under Section 173 of the Code to the concerned court. Reliance in this regard can be placed on Jagtar Singh vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh 1996 (1) RCR (Crl.) 669, wherein this Court held as under:

“These facts are not disputed. Language of Section 195(1) of the Code does not leave scope for any ambiguity and is the section which has to be construed strictly. In accordance with the settled principles of interpretation applicable to criminal jurisprudence the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code or penal laws have to be strictly construed so as to be given meaning except what is intended by the Legislature in the language used itself. The relevant portion of Section is that “No court shall take cognizance except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate.” The intention appears to be clear that where an offence is committed under Section 188 IPC, the legislature has made it obligatory that the public serv