The court established that FIRs under IPC and Disaster Management Act were unsustainable due to lack of required written complaints and absence of mens rea, allowing the quashing of the FIR.

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of present petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR being C.R. No. 11993004200453 of 2020, registered with Bhachau Police Station, Kachchh, for the offence punishable under Sections 188 , 505(1)b read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 54 of the Disaster Management Act and also under Section 13(i) of the Gujarat Epidemic Disease Covid-19 Regulations 2020 alongwith all its consequential proceedings.

2. The brief facts of the case are that:

2.1 On May 4, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the complainant was performing important health supervision duties in Bhachau. Around 7:45 PM, Dr. Raghav Pandya from Bhachau Government Hospital called the complainant and informed him that certain individuals had come to the hospital, claiming they had been in contact with a COVID-19 positive case in Ahmedabad. The complainant went to the hospital and met Dr.

Pandya, where they encountered Suresh Hadu Kanthecha and Anwar Ramju Khalifa. These individuals claimed that they had been in contact with Haresh Puna Parmar, a resident of Bhattpadiya, who was reported to be COVID-19 positive.

2.2 Subsequently, another individual, Ganesh Ghechda, who had also been in contact with the COVID-19 positive case, arrived at the hospital. The complainant gathered their details and notified his superior officers, including the Taluka Mamlatdar and Prant Officer. The complainant and his team then visited the home of Haresh Puna Parmar, where the family confirmed that Parmar was admitted to Ahmedabad Civil Hospital. The complainant recorded the names and addresses of those who had come in contact with Parmar and arranged for their institutional quarantine. The area was sanitized, and access was restricted.

2.3 Later, the Health Officer informed the complainant that Parmar's COVID-19 test result was negative, which the complainant confirmed via a WhatsApp lab report. It was then discovered that the individuals, including Khetshi Maru, Dinesh Kanthecha, Suresh Hadu Kanthecha, Anwar Ramju Khalifa, and Ganesh Ghechda, had made a false declaration about Parmar's COVID-19 status, misleading the government and creating unnecessary panic among the public. Hence, the complaint was filed.

3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely enroped in the present offence and he has nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged offence. The learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the applicants acted responsibly by voluntarily informing health authorities about their close contact with a COVID-19 patient, in line with Central and State Government guidelines to prevent the virus's spread. However, respondent No. 2 has been accused of demoralizing these citizens by "shooting the messenger." The fact that Haresh Puna Parmar passed away on May 6, 2020, suggests that the reports of his COVID-19 positive were accurate, and the applicants' vigilance likely prevented a wider outbreak.

4.1 It is submitted that the FIR alleges an offence under Section 188 of the IPC has been filed. However, Section 195 of the CrPC requires that such offences can only be pursued based on a written complaint by a public servant, not through an FIR. Therefore, the learned Advocate argues that the FIR is unsustainable and should be quashed. The petitioners' actions did not disturb public tranquility, and the essential element of mens rea required under Section 505(1)(b) of the IPC is absent in this case.

4.2 It is further submitted that the petitioners are also accused of an offence under Section 54 of the D