Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
Rama Nand Rathore - Appellant
Vs.
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr.MMO No. 276 of 2014
Decided On : 19-12-2014
Right to Information - Quashment of FIR - Indian Penal Code - Code of Criminal Procedure - Indian Evidence Act - [FACT OF THE CASE] The petitioner, a senior citizen, sought quashment of FIR No. 145 of 2014, registered under Sections 447 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, but the copy of the FIR was not made available to him. He applied for the copy through the Right to Information Act, 2005, but it was not provided. The court considered the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act in relation to the supply of FIR to the accused. [FINDING OF THE COURT] The court emphasized the importance of openness and transparency in a democratic society and held that the accused is entitled to receive a copy of the FIR at an earlier stage as prescribed under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. The court issued directions for the accused to obtain a certified copy of the FIR and for the uploading of FIRs on the official website of the police. [ISSUES] The main issue was the right of the accused to access the FIR and the public nature of the FIR. [RATIO DECIDENDI] The court relied on the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and emphasized the fundamental right to know about the affairs of the Government. The court also considered the constitutional perspective and the importance of personal liberty. [FINAL DECISION] The court issued directions for the accused to obtain a certified copy of the FIR and for the uploading of FIRs on the official website of the police.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
Democracy expects openness and openness is a concomitant of a free society and sunlight is the best disinfectant. It cannot be disputed that ordinary rule is that secrecy must be an exception, justifiable only when it is demanded by the requirement of public interest.
2. These observations are being made in context of the present petition which seeks quashment of FIR No. 145 of 2014, dated 29.11.2014, registered under Sections 447 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), registered at Police Station East, Chhota Shimla. However, the copy of the FIR has not been placed on record. In response to the query as to why the copy of FIR has not been placed on record, the petitioner, who is present in person, has stated that he is senior citizen of 70 years of age and retired as Assistant Commissioner from the Department of Excise and Taxation, Himachal Pradesh. Being a respectable person, he is too scared to go to the Police Station to get a copy of the FIR, because he may be arrested, since the complainant happens to be none other, than the Superintendent of Police at Shimla. He further apprised this Court that he has already applied for the copy of the same through his counsel on 4.12.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005, but the copy thereof has not been made available to him ostensibly because as per the usual practice, the outer limit of 30 days for supplying information as provided under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act is always considered to be the inner limit by those in the helm of affairs.
3. Indisputably, for the present, there is no provision for providing First Information Report under the codified limit, but then the liberty of an individual is inextricably linked with his right to be aware how he has been booked, under which law and what are the allegations set out against him. Liberty in freedom is the strongest passion of men and many have sacrificed their lives for the cause of liberty.
4. At this stage, it would be appropriate to take note of the various provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Code'):-
"154:- Information in cognizable cases:-
(1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant.
(3) Any person, aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record the information referred to in sub-section (1) may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence."
5. Section 154 of the Code provides for information as to the cognizable cases and investigation of such cases, whereas Section 156 of the Code provides for police officer's power to investigate cognizable cases. After investigation, final report is submitted by the police to the Magistrate having territorial jurisdiction. After completion of investigation and submission of charge-sheet, before trial, the accused is entitled to copies of the police report as provided in Section 207 of the Code. The said Section reads as follows:-
"207. Supply to the accused of copy of polic
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
