Back
2012 Supreme(Mad) 2134
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. NAGAMUTHU
Karuppa Gounder & Another
Versus
D. Sekar & Others
Crl.O.P.Nos.7520 & 7521 of 2012 & 1157 of 2010
Decided on : 10-05-2012
For the Appearing Parties:N. Manokaran, P.G. Thiyagu, V. Ayyathurai, Standing Counsel for Madras High Court, I. Subramaniam, learned Senior Counsel / Public prosecutor -Amicus Curiae assisted by M. Maharaja, K.P. Ananthakrishnan, Advocates.
The power to take cognizance of offences on a private complaint against police personnel lies only with the Judicial Magistrate having local jurisdiction.
Headnote:
Jurisdiction - Complaint against Police Personnel - Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b) and 506(ii) of I.P.C - Circular quashed - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
A complaint against police personnel was filed before a Judicial Magistrate, who declined to entertain it citing lack of jurisdiction. Similar complaints were filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who also declined jurisdiction. The conflicting stands raised the question of which court is empowered to entertain complaints against police personnel.
Finding of the Court:
The circular issued by the High Court conferring power to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to entertain complaints against police personnel was found to be invalid and unenforceable. The power to take cognizance of offences on a private complaint against police personnel lies only with the Judicial Magistrate having local jurisdiction.
Issues: Conflicting stands of two different courts on the jurisdiction to entertain complaints against police personnel, validity of the circular issued by the High Court conferring power to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Ratio Decidendi: The circular issued by the High Court conferring power to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to entertain complaints against police personnel was found to be invalid and unenforceable. The power to take cognizance of offences on a private complaint against police personnel lies only with the Judicial Magistrate having local jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The circular of the Madras High Court conferring power to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to entertain complaints against police personnel was quashed. The impugned order of return passed by the Judicial Magistrate was set aside, with liberty to the petitioner to re-present the complaint before the said Magistrate and on such re-presentation, the learned Magistrate shall deal with the said complaint in accordance with law. The Criminal Original Petitions were dismissed, with liberty to the petitioners to re-present the complaints before the learned Judicial Magistrate having local jurisdiction and on such representation, the jurisdictional Magistrate shall deal with the same strictly in accordance with law.
Common Order
1. A complaint against a few police personnel was filed before a learned Judicial Magistrate, having local jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate declined to entertain the complaint and returned the same to the complainant for presenting before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate. This order is, of course, in tune with a circular issued by the Madras High Court. In a different case, a complaint against a few police personnel and few others was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate also declined to entertain the complaint and returned the same for presenting the said complaint against the non police personnel before the learned Judicial Magistrate having local jurisdiction. These two conflicting stands taken by two different courts have raised an important question, as to who among the two is empowered to entertain a complaint against police personneland to take cognizance of the offences.
2. The above question has arisen in the following circumstances. The petitioner in Criminal Original Petition No.1157 of 2010 filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District, against an Inspector of Police by name Mr.Rajkumar and a Sub-Inspector of Police by name Mrs.Surumbar Kuzhali, alleging that they had committed offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b) and 506(ii) of I.P.C. The petitioner also alleges that these offences arise out of Human Rights Violation to be tried as per the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The learned Judicial Magistrate by order dated 07.08.2009, has returned the same stating that he has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the said offences as the accused are police personnel. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has come up with this criminal original petition.
3. The petitioner in Criminal Original Petition No.7520 of 2012 filed a private complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, against a few police officials and other officials from other departments alleging that they had committed offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 463, 464, 468, 109 and 201 of I.P.C. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate returned the said complaint by an order dated 13.02.2012, stating that a private complaint against police officials alone can be entertained by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, whereas in this case, some of the accused are not police officials. Challenging the said order, he has come up with this criminal original petition.
4. The petitioner in Criminal Original Petition No.7521 of 2012 filed a private complaint against an Inspector of Police and other officials including a private individual. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode returned the private complaint on similar grounds. Challenging the same, he has come up with this Criminal Original Petition.
5. Since, common legal issues are involved in these petitions, they were heard together and they are disposed of by this common order. No notice was ordered to the respondents as they are not entitled for notice at this stage.
6. When these matters were heard, since I was informed that there is in force, an Administrative Circular of this court issuing instructions to the Subordinate Judiciary that all complaints against police personnel shall be entertained only by the Chief Judicial Magistrates, I issued a direction to the Registrar General of this court to place the circular, if any, and also to submit his remarks. In pursuance of the same, the Registrar General has submitted a report on 17.04.2012 and also produced the circular in R.O.C.No.1062/2003/F1 (P.Dis.25/2003) dated 22.05.2003. The said circular reads as follows:-
CIRCULAR
Sub: Complaint - Private Complaint against Police Officials -To be filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in their respective Districts - Instructions Issued.
Read: P.Dis.No.597/60, dated 03.09.1960.
* * *
Instructions are enumerated at page 369 of th
