High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : J.S.Ranawat,D.S.Dave
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Appellant
Versus
MAHMOOD GHASI MUSALMAN - Respondent
Criminal Appeal 99 Of 1961
Decided On : 04/28/1961
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 247 - APPLICABILITY - POLICE REPORT - COMPLAINT - DISTINCTION - SECTION 190 (1) (B) - AMENDMENT - EFFECT.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a fight between two individuals, Mahmood and Gopilal, in a public road, leading to a disturbance of public peace. The Station House Officer submitted a report to the Sub-divisional Magistrate, who registered a case and issued processes against the accused. On the hearing date, the Public Prosecutor failed to appear, and the Magistrate dismissed the case and acquitted the accused under Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code was not applicable in this case because the case was registered on a police report, not a private complaint. The court distinguished between a police report and a complaint, stating that a police report is made by a police officer in the exercise of their duties, while a complaint is an allegation made to a Magistrate with a view to taking action under the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues: 1. Whether the report of the Station House Officer can be treated as a complaint under Section 4 (1) (h) of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Whether the provisions of Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code are attracted to cases registered on a police report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the definition of "complaint" in Section 4 (1) (h) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the provisions of Section 24 of the Police Act to conclude that the report of the Station House Officer was a police report, not a complaint. The court also referred to the amendment of Section 190 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code in 1923, which clarified that a Magistrate can take cognizance of a non-cognizable offense upon a report made by a police officer.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
RANAWAT, J.
( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the State from an order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate, baran dated the 14th of October 1960, dismissing the case on default of the appearance of the Public Prosecutor or someone on his behalf. Though no specific provision of law has been referred to by the Sub-divisional Magistrate under which he purported to act, yet from the nature of the order that was written by the said officer, it seems that he presumably desired to take action under Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code in dismissing the case.
( 2 ) THE Station House Officer Police Kotwali Baran district Kota submitted a report to the Sub-divisional Magistrate on the 7th of September 1960 stating the facts of an occurrence that was alleged to have taken place on the 2nd of September, 1960 at 11 a. m. in the bazar of Baran and in which the accused Mahmood and gopilal indulged in a fight on a public road which, in the opinion of the Police officer, was likely to lead to a disturbance of the public peace. The report further stated that an offence under Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code of affray had been committed by the accused persons and that suitable action may be taken against them. On receipt of the report, the Sub-divisional Magistrate registered a case and issued processes against the accused persons and when they appeared on the 24th of September, 1960 he examined them and also summoned prosecution witnesses to appear on the next date. On the date fixed for the hearing, the Public Prosecutor failed to appear and the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate, therefore, dismissed the case and acquitted the accused persons. In this appeal it has been urged that the order of the Magistrate was wrong inasmuch as Section 247 was not applicable to the case for it had not been registered on a private complaint cognizance having been taken on a police report. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate acquitting the accused may be set aside and the case remanded for further trial.
( 3 ) NOTICES were issued to the accused persons, but they have failed to put in their appearance. It may be noted that under Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure code, it is incumbent on a Magistrate to acquit the accused unless for some reason he thinks proper to adjourn the hearing of the case to some other day, if the summons had been issued on complaint and if upon the day appointed for the appearance of the accused, or any day subsequent thereto to which the hearing is adjourned the complainant fails to appear. In the instant case, the Station House officer, Police Station Baran submitted a report and the case was taken cognizance of on that report. The question for determination is whether the report of the Station House Officer, under the circumstances of this case, can be treated to be a report of a police officer for the purposes of Section 247 of the Criminal procedure Code, or a complaint as defined by Section 4 (1) (h) of the Criminal procedure Code. According to the definition under Section 4 (1) (h) "complaint" means the allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under the criminal Procedure Code, that some person whether known or unknown, has committed an offence. A report of a police officer made in exercise of his powers and duties as such officer is not a complaint. However, a police officer is not incompetent to make a complaint in his private and individual capacity and in such a case his report may be regarded to be a complaint. The point at issue thus is whether the report of the police officer in the instant case amounted to a complaint? In cognisable cases, the police officers have to submit their reports under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and such reports are reports of police officers and they are not complaints under Section 4 (1) (h ). Reports submitted by police officers in pursuance of direction issued to them by magistrates,
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.