Back
1998 Supreme(P&H) 664
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
K.K. Srivastava, J.
Gurdeep Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondents
Criminal Misc. Nos. 41 and 42 of 1998 and Criminal Writ Petition No. 1656/97 (O&M).
Decided On : 11 May, 1998
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Police Action and Procedure
Headnote
FIR Registration - Police Action - The court directed the SHO to register an FIR based on the petitioner's complaint, emphasizing the mandatory nature of FIR registration under Section 154(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought direction for the registration of an FIR based on his complaint, as the police did not take appropriate action on the complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the police had conducted an enquiry into the complaint, concluded it to be false, and refused to register an FIR. However, the court emphasized the mandatory nature of FIR registration under Section 154(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code and directed the SHO to register the FIR based on the petitioner's complaint.
Issues: The main issue was whether the police were obligated to register an FIR based on the petitioner's complaint, despite their conclusion that the complaint was false.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of Section 154(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code clearly direct the registration of an FIR in respect of an occurrence disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence, and that a fact-finding enquiry to determine the veracity of the complaint is not contemplated prior to FIR registration.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the court directed the SHO to register an FIR based on the petitioner's complaint within two weeks of the receipt of the court's order.
For the Petitioner:Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Petitioner.
For the Respondents: Mr. Surinder Lamba, AAG, Haryana.
ORDER
K.K. Srivastava, J. - This petition has been filed by Gurdeep Singh in person seeking issuance of direction to the respondents for registration of FIR on the basis of complaint. The police of the concerned Police Station did not take any appropriate action on the complaint of the petitioner and resultantly, the petitoner filed this petition. A copy of the representation dated 1.9.97 has been annexed as Annexure P1 which is addressed to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Ellenabad (Sirsa). A copy of representation dated 26.9.97, Annexure P2, is addressed to Superintendant of Police, Sirsa praying for registration of FIR against Bhajan Kaur wife of Ajit Singh r/o Kariwala and her daughter Nirmal Kaur under Section 294. Copy of the letter in this regard dated 1.9.97 was enclosed with the representaiton Annexure P2. A copy of the representation was endorsed to Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa, D.G.P., Haryana, Chandigarh and Incharge Police Post Kariwala, Sirsa.
2. Notice was issued to the respondents and reply has been filed in the shape of affidavit of Shri Hukam Chand, ASI, Incharge police post Kariwala, District Sirsa deposing, inter alia, in paras 4 and 6 as under :
"That contents of para No. 4 of the petition, as given are wrong and incorrect. An application dated 26.9.1997 (Annexure P-2) moved by the petitioner was also received in Police Post Kariwala through worthy Supreintendent of Police, Sirsa on 7.10.1997 for enquiry. Deponent conducted an enquiry into that complaint. Statement of Smt. Bhajan Kaur wife of Shri Ajit Singh, Kumhar Sikh, resident of village Kariwala was recorded and a joint statement of inhabitants of the village namely Ajit Singh son of Shingara Singh, Kumhar Sikh, Gurmej Singh son of Gurbax Singh, Jat Sikh, Kashmir Singh Panch and Jagtar Singh son of Teja Singh was also recorded on 24.10.1997 whereupon the application moved by the petitioner was found to be false and a report to this effect was sent by the deponent to the higher officers. The complaint (Annexure P-2) moved by the petitioner was filed by the worthy Superintendent of Police, Sirsa. That contentions of para No. 6 of the petition are wrong and incorrect, hence denied. No information of some cognizable offence was given by the petitioner in Police Post Kariwala. There is no violation of Rule 24.5 of the Punjab Police Rules or Sections 154, 155 Criminal Procedure Code The application complaint moved by the petitioner being false has been filed by the Supreintendent of Police, Sirsa."
3. It has been averred in para 9 of the reply that the petitoner never came to lodge the alleged information in Police Post Kariwala. Application Annexure P-2 moved by the petitioner was duly enquired into and found to be forged. In para 10 it was, inter alia, alleged that the respondents have always been implementing the Police Rules and they have never violated any provision of law. Section 294 Indian Penal Code is a cognizable offence which is triable by the Magistrate. The provisions of Section 154(1) Criminal Procedure Code clearly direct about the registration of FIR in respect of an occurrence during which commission of cognizable offence is disclosed. The enquiry prior to the registration of the FIR as distinct from the investigation of the case is not envisaged under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and at any rate a fact finding enquiry in detail is not comtemplated during which the averments of the complaint are to be determined and concluded as being false and baseless. If investigation of the case after registration of the FIR shows that no offence was allegedly made out, then, a cancellation report can be submitted to the concerned Court for acceptance and to be dealt with in accordance with law. After carefully considering the matter, I am of the view that this petition should be allowed and a direction should be issued to the SHO, P.S. Kariwala- respondent No. 4 to register FIR on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner,
