Legitimate exercise of powers by investigation officers within the framework of the Code of Criminal Procedure and prevention of police harassment during enquiry.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry.)

1. This criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondents police harassed the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

3. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that upon the complaint given by the third respondent against this petitioner, petition enquiry is pending in C.S.R.No.130 of 2020, on the file of the second respondent police.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

5. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the second respondent police has been harassing him under the guise of an enquiry/investigation and hence, invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is necessary for protecting the rights of the petitioner.

6. An enquiry into a non cognizable offence or a cognizable offence is the unfettered powers of the Investigation Officers so long as the power to investigate/enquire into these offences are legitimately exercised within the frame work of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to be a guardian in all the stages of the police investigation, there is no power envisaging him to interfere with the actual investigation or the mode of investigation. It is in this background that numerous petitions complaining of harassment are being reported and filed before this Court seeking for directions to refrain the police officials from harassing the persons named in a complaint.

7. This Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code normally would not interfere with the investigation conducted by a police officer. Nevertheless, it would also not turn a blind eye to instances of harassment by the police under the guise of investigation is brought to its notice.

8. In the present case in hand, the petitioner has complained of harassment by the police based on a complaint and seek for this Court's intervention by way of a direction. The term 'harassment' by itself has a very wide meaning and hence, what could be harassment to the petitioner may not be the same to the police officer.

9. In order to circumvent such situations, the following guidelines are issued:

(a) While summoning any person named in the complaint or any witness to the incident complained of, the police officer shall summon such person through a written summon under Section 160 Cr.P.C., specifying a particular date and time for appearing before them for such an enquiry/investigation.

(b) The second respondent police is directed to serve summons mentioning the CSR number, date of complaint and the name of the complainant.

(c) The minutes of the enquiry shall be recorded in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the police station.

(d) The police officer shall refrain himself or herself from harassing persons called upon for enquiry/investigation.

(e) The guidelines stipulated for preliminary enquiry or registration of FIR by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)] shall be strictly adhered to.

10. With the above observations and directions, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.