SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 200

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
NITIN JAMDAR, C.J., S.MANU, J.
N.Prakash, Son Of Late A.Narayana Rao - Appellant
Versus
Manoj Kumar, Son Of Mathippu Raj - Respondent
WA NO. 1803 OF 2024
Decided on : 30-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : N.PRAKASH(Party-In-Person)
For the Respondent: GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN

The classification of writ petitions under Article 226 depends on the nature of the relief sought; if it may lead to criminal prosecution, it should be treated as a criminal writ petition.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Writ Petition (Civil) vs. Writ Petition (Criminal) - The distinction between civil and criminal writ petitions is based on the nature of the relief sought and the potential consequences of the proceedings. The court emphasized that if a writ petition could lead to criminal prosecution, it should be classified as a criminal writ petition. (Paras 5, 15, 16)

(B) Jurisdiction - The classification of writ petitions under Article 226 does not have a statutory basis but is guided by the nature of the proceedings and the relief sought. The court noted that the nomenclature of the petition does not alter its substance. (Paras 6, 16)

Facts of the case:
The Appellant challenged the dismissal of a writ petition seeking action against police officers for alleged criminal trespass and failure to register an FIR based on a complaint. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition, stating that FIRs can proceed as per law.

Findings of Court:
The appeal must be treated as a criminal writ petition due to the potential for criminal prosecution arising from the complaint.

Issues: The main issue was whether the writ petition should be classified as civil or criminal based on the nature of the relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the classification of writ petitions should depend on the potential consequences of the proceedings, reaffirming that a petition leading to criminal prosecution must be treated as a criminal writ petition.

Result: Appeal to be placed before the appropriate Bench for criminal writ petitions.

ORDER

Nitin Jamdar, C.J.

Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased to direct the third respondent to submit a report before this Honourable Court as to the steps , if any, taken in pursuance to Exhibit P6, pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal.

This Writ appeal again coming on for orders on 30/01/2025 upon perusing the appeal memorandum and this court's order dated 16/12/2024, the court on the same day passed the following:

The Appellant has challenged the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 30 October 2024 in W.P.(C)No.36058 of 2024, dismissing the petition.

2. The Appellant/Petitioner filed the writ petition for a direction to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, i.e., the Station House Officer and the Assistant Commissioner of Police, respectively, to take necessary action on the Ext.P6 complaint filed by the Petitioner. A writ was also sought to take action against Respondent No. 3 - Station House Officer for not registering the First Information Report (FIR) based on the Ext.P6 complaint. By way of Ext.P6 complaint, the Petitioner had alleged that on 28 July 2024, the Police Officer deployed by the Station House Officer, Puliyangudi Police Station, Tenkasi, who was in uniform, and two other persons in civil dress entered the house of the Petitioner. According to the Petitioner, the persons who were not in uniform were, in fact, the Complainant and his friend, and, therefore, they had committed criminal trespass.

3. Essentially, what the Petitioner sought by this writ petition was that the complaint be investigated and the Respondents be prosecuted and punished accordingly. The writ petition was filed as a Writ Petition (Civil). The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, declining to issue any directions for holding the enquiry and investigation into the complaint and holding that the FIR can go on as per law.

4. When the appeal came up before us, it was pointed out that, as per the Roster, appeals from orders passed in criminal writ petitions pertain to another Bench. That being the position, we looked into whether the present writ petition is a criminal or civil writ petition.

5. The Registrar (Judicial) has submitted a note as to the position regarding the civil and criminal writ petitions. The Registry has pointed out that the nomenclature W.P.(Crl.) was adopted in the High Court for petitions under Article 226 for writ of Habeas Corpus and other relief in relation to criminal proceedings vide notification dated 11 April 2013. The notification dated 11 April 2013 refers to the resolution of the Chief Justices' Conference, 1997 and the adoption of categorisation and nomenclature of cases. This includes the categorisation of writ petitions under Article 226 as civil writ petitions and as criminal writ petitions. Therefore, since 2013, the Registry has been categorising the writ petitions as Writ Petitions (Civil) and Writ Petitions (Criminal). Another notification was issued on 30 September 2021 stating that petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for reliefs in relation to criminal proceedings should be filed and numbered as Writ Petition (Criminal), the abbreviation should be used as W.P.(Crl.). The Registry has pointed out that as per the Roster, the Single Bench writ petitions go to two learned Single Judges and the writ appeals arising from order/judgment in Writ Petition (Criminal) are placed before two Division Benches and the Writ Petitions (Criminal) for Habeas Corpus are placed directly before the Division Bench. It is also pointed out that once a petition is filed as W.P. (C) or W.P.(Crl.) as per the codes given to these petitions at the initial stage as per the software, matters are placed before the learned Single Judge or the Division Bench as the case may be. No decision of this court or any specific Rule making a distinction between the criminal and civil writ petitions is placed before us.

6.

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
          whatsapp-icon Back to top