Prima Facie Contempt: High Court Raps Punjab Police For Violating Lalita Kumari Guidelines, Initiating Enquiries On Same Allegation Sans FIR

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday pulled up the Punjab Police officers for initiating multiple enquiries against a man without registering any FIR, prima facie in contempt of the Supreme Court's directions in the Lalita Kumari case.

Justice N.S. Shekhawat said, "it is clear that the official respondents have violated the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Lalita Kumari's case...and this Court in Jaswinder Singh's case...and thus, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that respondents No.2 and 5 (Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, DSP (Traffic) District SAS Nagar (Mohali)) have committed the contempt of court for having violated the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court in this regard."

In Lalita Kumari Vs.Govt. Of U.P [(SC) 2013(4) RCR Criminal 979] it was held that, "Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.

If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not...While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time bound and in any case it should not exceed fifteen days generally and in execptional cases, by giving adequate reasons, six weeks time is provided."

Court said "in number of cases, the complaints are moved to the senior police officers and multiple/repeated enquiries are being conducted in every district of Punjab including SAS Nagar (Mohali) by various police officers."

Observing that in the  present case, "it is evident that third enquiry is being conducted on the basis of complaint moved by the same complainant on the same set of allegations," the Court said it is violation of Article 21 rights of the accused.

The Court was hearing a petition under Section 482 CrPC with a prayer to issue appropriate directions to DSP, Mohali Punjab to not to harass the petitioners by calling them unnecessarily in his office, in respect of complaint made by a person as earlier two inquiries reports had already been filed by the superior police officers and allegations against him have "found to be of civil nature."

The counsel for petitioner argued that the matter for which the petitioner was allegedly harassed by initiating three enquiries by the police is "civil in nature" and once two detailed enquiries had been conducted by the Police, there was no justification of holding an enquiry again. He further contended that as per the instructions issued by the office of DGP, Punjab, no such enquiries can be conducted on the basis of same set of allegations, when the complaint has been moved by same complainant to the Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar.

The Court noted that the DGP, Punjab, had informed the Court that his office had issued instructions in 2008, elaborating the procedure to be followed in future and the instructions will be followed in principle by the field officer. It was also stated that as a matter of principle, only one inquiry was required. 

Considering the submissions the Court referred to Lalita Kumari case to underscore that "Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court had deprecated the holding of enquiries by the police officers, without registration of an FIR."

It added that the several similar cases have come up wherein the multiple enquiries are being conducted by different police officials for the last several months in District SAS Nagar. Consequently, Justice Shekhawat directed the SSP of Punjab's SAS Nagar to submit the following details with regard to the enquiries being conducted without registration of the FIR:

(1) Name of the complainant;

(2) date and receipt of the complaint;

(3) date of initiation of the enquiry;

(4) number of enquiries conducted in every such matter;

(5) the fate of each enquiry conducted by the police;

(6) name of the official, who is conducting the present enquiry; (7) how many inquiries have been conducted in each case.

While listing the matter for February 12, the Court appointed Advocate Tanu Bedi, as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court.

Appearance: S.K.Jain, Advocate with Anubhav Singla, Advocate and

Abhimanyu Garg, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab.

Title: Surinder Kumar and others Vs State of Pb and others

Click here to read/download the order