Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
[DIVISION BENCH]
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Acting Chief Justice Jasbir Singh
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain
CWP No.21898 of 2012
Ajay Jagga
v.
State of Punjab & Ors.
{Decided on 16/05/2013}
After considering the matter at hand, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- “An accused is entitled to get a copy of the First Information Report at an earlier stage than as prescribed under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C.--An accused who has reasons to suspect that he has been roped in a criminal case and his name may be finding place in a First Information Report can submit an application through his representative / agent / parokar for grant of a certified copy before the concerned police officer or to the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police Police/Inspector General of Police on payment of such fee which is payable for obtaining such a copy from the court--On such application being made, the copy shall be supplied within twenty-four hours--Once the First Information Report is forwarded by the police station to the concerned Magistrate or any Special Judge, on an application being filed for certified copy on behalf of the accused, the same shall be given by the court concerned within two working days--The aforesaid direction has nothing to do with the statutory mandate inhered under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C.--The copies of the FIR, unless reasons recorded regard being had to the nature of the offence that the same is sensitive in nature, should be uploaded on the Punjab Police/Haryana Police/Chandigarh Police website within twenty-four hours of lodging of the FIR so that the accused or any person connected with the same can download the FIR and file appropriate application before the court as per law for redressal of his grievances--The decision not to upload the copy of the FIR on the website of Punjab Police/Haryana Police/Chandigarh Police shall not be taken by an officer below the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police and that too by way of a speaking order--A decision so taken by the Deputy Commissioner of Police shall also be duly communicated to the Area magistrate--The word `sensitive’ apart from the other aspects which may be thought of being sensitive by the competent authority as stated hereinbefore would also include concept of privacy regard being had to the nature of the FIR--In case a copy of the FIR is not provided on the ground of sensitive nature of the case, a person aggrieved by the said action, after disclosing his identity, can submit a representation with the Director General of Police, Punjab & Haryana and Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh who shall constitute a committee of three higher officers and the committee shall deal with the said grievance within three days from the date of receipt of the representation and communicate it to the grieved person--The Director General of Police, Punjab & Haryana and the Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh shall constitute the committee within eight weeks from today--In cases wherein decisions have been taken not to give copies of the FIR regard being had to the sensitive nature of the case, it will be open to the accused / his authorized representative / parokar to file an application for grant of certified copy before the court to which the FIR has been sent and the same shall be provided in quite promptitude by the concerned court not beyond three days of the submission of the application--The directions for uploading the FIR on the website of the Punjab Police, Haryana Police and the Chandigarh Police shall be given effect from 1st July, 2013.” (Para 11)
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.:- The petitioner is a practicing advocate who has brought the present Public Interest Litigation to seek directions against the respondents to upload copy of the FIR on the official website of the respondents immediately after it is registered and provide a copy of the FIR to the named accused immediately on an application moved to the concerned Police Station or the concerned Trial Court, as the case may be. In order to strengthen his prayer, reliance has been placed upon Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India, which reads as under:-
“21. Protection of life and personal liberty:- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
“22. Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases:- (1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.
(2) Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.
(3) Nothing in clauses (1) and (2) shall apply—
(a) to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien; or
(b) to any person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention.
(4) No law providing for preventive detention shall authorize the detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless—
(a) an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or have been, or are qualified to be appointed as, Judges of a High Court has reported before the expiration of the said period of three meonths that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention:
Provided that nothing in this clause shall authorize the detention of any person beyond the maximum period prescribed by any law made by Parliament under sub-clause (a) of clause (7); or (b) such person is detained in accordance with the provisions of any law made by Parliament under sub-clauses (a) and (b) of clause (7). (5) When any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under any law providing for preventive detention, the authority making the order shall, as soon as may be, communicate to such person the grounds on which the order has been made and shall afford him the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order.
(6) Nothing in clause (5) shall require the authority making any such order as is referred to in that clause to disclose facts which such authority considers to be against the public interest to disclose.
(7) Parliament may by law prescribe—
(a) the circumstances under which, and the class or classes of cases in which, a person may be detained for a period longer than three months under any law providing for preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board in accordance with the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (4);
(b) the maximum period for which any person may in any class or classes of cases be detained under any law providing for preventive detention; and
(c) the procedure to be followed by an Advisory Board in an inquiry under sub-clause (a) of clause (4).”
2. He further submitted that the FIR is registered in terms of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereinafter referred to as the “Cr.P.C.”] but the copy thereof is given in terms of Section 207 of Cr.P.C., which stage came at a very belated point. He further submitted that copy of the FIR is a public document in terms of Sections 74 and 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and has further relied upon a Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Court on its Own Motion through Mr. Aj
SupremeToday
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
