Registration Of FIR Mandatory Whenever A Person Dies In Police Encounter Alleged To Be Fake: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that an FIR has to be mandatorily registered whenever a person dies in a police encounter which is alleged to be fake.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed Delhi Police's plea against a trial court order directing registration of FIR against a police raiding team in respect of the death of one Rakesh in a police encounter in 2013.

The Lt. Governor had ordered a Magisterial enquiry into the incident which concluded that no illegality or illegal act as alleged by the witnesses from the side of the deceased's father had been committed by the members of the police team.

Thereafter, the father filed an FIR for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 34 of IPC and Section 27 Arms Act. It was his case that his son h had been murdered intentionally by the Police.

He alleged that none of the three accused persons, who were allegedly running to escape from a car when the incident took place, had fired towards the police and none of the police officials received any injury. He further alleged that the deceased was allegedly mercilessly beaten by the police officials with some blunt object and thereafter, they fired upon the car only to save themselves from the commission of offence.

It was the police's case that the incident had been thoroughly enquired into by the SDM who concluded that the bullets were fired by the Police Officials in an act of self-defence in order to save themselves from the occupant of the car who had fired upon them.

Upholding the trial court order, the court relied on a plethora of judgments and reiterated that in a society governed by law, extra-judicial killings must be properly and independently investigated so that justice may be done.

Observing that the investigations are required to ascertain whether it was a case of murder or of an encounter, the court said:

“Moreover, as per the inspection report, tyres of the vehicle were not deflated. Rather, the firing was on the window pane of the car. Had the firing been targeted on the tyres, they would have been deflated and the car would have been stopped, following which the accused persons could have been apprehended. Pertinently, no police official was injured despite the claim that the persons had fired at them too. The circumstances leading to the death of Rakesh need to be explained.”

On police's submission that no criminal investigations can be carried out against the Public Officer without grant of sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C, the court said that the provision . does not extend its protective cover to every act or omission done by a public servant in service.

It said that the provision in question restricts its scope of operation to only those acts or omissions which are done by a public servant in discharge of official duty.

“Therefore, it is established proposition of law requirement of Sanction under S.197 Cr.P.C. is necessary for the acts done by the Official in discharge of duty and would not scuttle the registration of FIR, as it can be obtained subsequently, if the circumstances so warrant,” the court said.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, SPP, Mr. Ranjeeb Kamal Bora and Ms. Jyoti Babbar, Advs

Counsel for Respondent: Ms. Smritee Relan, Ms. Shweta Dhingra, Mr. Archit Bhardwaj and Ms. Hazel Bhardwaj, Advs. for R-1; Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for State

Title: STATE OF NCT OF DELHI v. PURAN SINGH

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 887

Click Here To Read Order