Telangana High Court
WP/42506/2015 of Peddapalli Lorry Transports Owners Welfare Society, Vs State of Telanagana, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, on 30 December 2015
SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.42506 OF 2015 O R D E R The grievance of the petitioner is that the police authorities have not registered a FIR on its complaint dated 14.12.2015. The scope and import of the statutory obligation of the police to register a FIR upon receiving a
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMARWRIT PETITION No.42506 OF 2015
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
The grievance of the petitioner is that the police authorities havenot registered a FIR on its complaint dated 14.12.2015.
The scope and import of the statutory obligation of the police toregister a FIR upon receiving a complaint is no longer res integra. InLALITA KUMARI V/s. GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH[[1]], theSupreme Court, speaking through a Constitution Bench, summarized thelaw in connection with the registration of crimes as under:
1. The registration of a FIR is mandatory under Section 154Cr.P.C., if the information discloses commission of acognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible insuch a situation.
2. If the information received does not disclose a cognizableoffence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminaryinquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether acognizable offence is disclosed or not.
3. If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizableoffence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where thepreliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of theentry of such closure must be supplied to the first informantforthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose thereasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceedingfurther.
4. A police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering a FIR if acognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken againsterring officers who do not register the FIR if informationreceived by him discloses a cognizable offence.
5. The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracityor otherwise of the information received but only to ascertainwhether the information reveals any cognizable offence.
6. As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is tobe conducted will depend on the facts and circumstances ofeach case. The category of cases in which preliminary inquirymay be made are as under:
a.Matrimonial disputes/family disputes
b.Commercial offences
c.Medical negligence cases
d.Corruption cases
e.Cases where there is abnormal delay/laches in initiating acriminal prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay inreporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining thereasons for delaycriminal prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay inreporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining thereasons for delay
7. While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused andthe complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time-bound and in any case it should not exceed 7 days. The fact ofsuch delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the generaldiary entry.the complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time-bound and in any case it should not exceed 7 days. The fact ofsuch delay and the causes of it must be reflected in the generaldiary entry.
8. Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is therecord of all information received in a police station, allinformation relating to cognizable offences, whether resultingin registration of a FIR or leading to an inquiry, must bemandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said Diary andthe decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also bereflected therein.record of all information received in a police station, allinformation relating to cognizable offences, whether resultingin registration of a FIR or leading to an inquiry, must bemandatorily and meticulously reflected in the said Diary andthe decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also bereflected therein.
In the light of the aforestated settled legal position, it is not open tothe police authorities to deviate therefrom or show any tardiness in takingappropriate necessary action after receiving a complaint alleging acognizable criminal offence. In the event the offence alleged is a non-cognizable one, the police authorities are bound to follow the dueprocedure laid down in Section 155 Cr.P.C. In any event, the policeauthorities must take suitable action in the matter expeditiously. TheDirectors General of Police of the States of the Andhra Pradesh andTelangana shall issue necessary instructions in this regard to all thepolice officials in the States, so that the law laid down by the SupremeCourt is implemented in true letter and spirit.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of reiterating theaforestated directions of the Supreme Court. Pending miscellaneouspetitions shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as tocosts.
______________________
30.12.2015
GJ
SANJAY KUMAR, J