Court Cannot Order Registration Of FIR Against Investigating Officer U/S 218 IPC Sans Inquiry: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court has clarified that offences under Sections 218 and 219 of the IPC which pertain to a public servant framing incorrect records for saving a person from punishment and making reports in a corrupt manner, cannot be invoked without initiation of inquiry or in absence of any evidence.In the event that these provisions are wrongly invoked such that they would adversely...
The Gujarat High Court has clarified that offences under Sections 218 and 219 of the IPC which pertain to a public servant framing incorrect records for saving a person from punishment and making reports in a corrupt manner, cannot be invoked without initiation of inquiry or in absence of any evidence.
In the event that these provisions are wrongly invoked such that they would adversely affect and prejudice the career of the public servant, the High Court can expunge the relevant parts from the judicial order of the Magistrate.
Justice Vaibhavi Nanavati stated:
"The aforesaid sections have been invoked without initiation of any inquiry or any material on record and in absence of any evidence and the same amounts to prejudice to the writ-applicant causing irreparable injury to the writ-applicant and the same would also amount to adversely affect and prejudice the career of the writ-applicant."
Accordingly, the High Court expunged the relevant portions in the operative part of the Sessions Court's order.
The Single Judge Bench was hearing a petition by an Investigating Officer challenging the order of the Sessions Judge who had opined that the Officer had filed a C Summary Report and illegally removed the names of three accused persons and thereby committed offences u/s 218 and 219.
The IO submitted that he had verified the cell phone, call details, tower locations, past enmity with the Complainant, CCTV footage, evidence against other accused and likelihood of involvement of the accused to conclude that the accused persons had an alibi and were not involved in the offence. It could not be said that he was derelict in his duties. Further, merely because a person was named in the FIR did not imply that the person was involved in the commission of the offence. Therefore, the police officers were not bound to name such persons in the FIR even if no material was found against such a person.
The APP could not oppose these contentions.
Upon perusing the facts of the case and the impugned order, the High Court referred to State of Maharashtra & Ors., vs. Tasneem Rizwan Siddiquee where the Apex Court had expunged unwarranted remarks made by the lower court without giving any hearing to the officers from the judicial order.
Accordingly, the High Court held that the Court below could not have passed the impugned order without giving any opportunity of hearing the officer to explain the factual position.
Thus, the writ-application was allowed.
Case No.: R/SCR.A/2410/2019
Case Title: JAYRAJSINH MADHUBHA GADHVI v/s STATE OF GUJARAT
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 358
Click Here To Read/Download Order