The police are mandated to register an FIR when information discloses a cognizable offense, without questioning the reliability of the information at that stage.

JUDGMENT

S. Talapatra, J. - Being aggrieved by the action of the police, the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India urging direction on the respondents to keep complaints of the petitioner dated 13.09.2020 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) and dated 20.08.2021 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) filed before Officer in Charge of RK Pur police station (reproduced with accuracy). In short, non registration of the FIR on the basis of the said complaint has aggrieved the petitioner.

2. According to the petitioner, the said complaint clearly discloses cognizable offence and despite that position, no case was registered against the accused persons. The police, without registering a case for commission of the offence as disclosed by the said complaint (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), entered the substance of the said complaint in the station diary vide RK Pur Police Station GDE No. 22 dated 20.08.2021 and thereafter, the police submitted a prosecution report (PR, for short) vide No. RK Pur PS PR No. 197 dated 03/09/2021 under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C. According to the petitioner, the said act is not only unfair on the part of the police but an act in defiance of the mandate of the statute.

3. In the complaint (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), it has been disclosed that when the petitioner created the tenancy for rent, the accused person, (not impleaded) raided that place with a lathi in his hand. The accused person demanded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the complainant and threatened that the complainant shall not construct any hut over the land pertaining to Plot No. 752/3666 recorded in Khatian No. 2044 of Mouja Rajarbag measuring .08 acre.

4. The complainant has the possession over the Plot No. 752/4833 and 753/4834 measuring .013 acre adjoining the earlier plot and alongside the national highway No. 8. The said occurrence, as referred before, took place on 01.09.2020 on the land measuring .03 acre. It has been also complained that the accused person threatened the complainant that he would kill him. As the police did not register the case, the complainant had addressed a letter dated 14.12.2020 to the Superintendent of Police, Gomati district, Udaipur complaining of non-registration of the case, but no positive action yielded from the authority. Even subsequent thereto i.e. 30.08.2020, the petitioner made request to the Superintendent of Police, Gomati district, Udaipur to take action based on the said complaint but that was not heeded to. Even he had knocked the door of various other authorities seeking justice.

5. In response to this allegation, the respondents filed a combined reply and stated that from the complaint no cognizable offence did reveal and in their assessment there was apprehension of breach of peace from the dispute regarding the land and as such, the police recorded the substance of the complaint in the station diary and submitted the prosecution report to the Executive Magistrate for taking appropriate action, as provided by law.

6. The prosecution report has been enclosed. It appears there from that, for maintaining and peace and tranquility in the area, the said prosecution report was submitted against three persons, namely, (1) Ikbal Hossain, (2) Biswajit Debnath and (3) Smt. Niyati Bishnu Chowdhury (Kar). There no prosecution report against the person named in the complaint.

7. Thereafter, on 15.02.2022, an additional affidavit has been filed by the respondents No. 1-4 in pursuance to the order of this c