- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Kerala High Court
- /
- Police Officer Who Registered Suo...
Police Officer Who Registered Suo Moto Case Can't Be Asked To Compensate Accused U/S 250 CrPC Upon Acquittal: Kerala High Court
Tellmy Jolly
26 Aug 2023 4:05 PM IST
The Kerala High Court recently held that a police officer who registered a a suo moto case cannot be asked to compensate the accused after acquittal under Section 250 of CrPC. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that under Section 250 CrPC, compensation can only be ordered when a case was instituted upon a complaint or upon information given to a police officer. It held thus:“The said...
The Kerala High Court recently held that a police officer who registered a a suo moto case cannot be asked to compensate the accused after acquittal under Section 250 of CrPC.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that under Section 250 CrPC, compensation can only be ordered when a case was instituted upon a complaint or upon information given to a police officer. It held thus:
“The said provision contemplates specific instances when such compensation can be ordered. The provision commences with the words “instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate”. The intention of the legislature is very clear from the words used, since the code has defined the terms ‘complaint’ in Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., as excluding a police report.”
Section 250 of the CrPC enables a Magistrate to order compensation to the accused who was acquitted on finding that the accusations were made without reasonable grounds, when such case was instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate.
The petitioner, a sub-inspector of police, registered a crime against the accused under Section 51(A) of the Kerala Police Act, 1960 alleging that he was found behaving in a disorderly manner by uttering obscene words causing nuisance to the pedestrians and the neighbors. During trial, the Magistrate found that the accused had not consumed alcohol and false medical certificate was produced before the Court. On finding that the petitioner, who registered the crime and the accused had a personal rivalry, the Magistrate ordered the petitioner to pay a compensation of rupees five thousand to the accused u/s 250 of CrPC. This order was confirmed by the Sessions Court. It was challenged before the High Court.
The counsel for the petitioner, relying upon Krishnan Moopan M.B. v State of Kerala and Anr (2005) stated that the order directing payment of compensation by the petitioner under Section 250 CrPC was inherently without jurisdiction and was liable to be set aside.
The counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner, due to a personal rivalry had registered the false crime against the accused. It was also argued that if police officers initiate false complaints due to their personal enmity, the court was empowered to impose compensation if it was satisfied that the case was registered without any basis.
The Court held that Section 250 CrPC provides that compensation can be ordered by Magistrate if case was instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a Magistrate without reasonable cause. The Court stated that the term complaint excludes a police report. The court relying upon Krishnan Moopan M.B. v The State of Kerala and Another (2005) held that Section 250 CrPC does not contemplate an action against a police officer on whose report the cognizance was taken.
The Court stated that literal interpretation of Section 250 CrPC was clear and compensation can be ordered only on a case instituted upon a complaint or upon information given to a police officer. It held that the compensation imposed upon the petitioner under Section 250 CrPC was irregular and can he proceed against the person who initiated such a false prosecution, under the general civil law. It held thus:
“It is apposite to point out at this juncture that a person alleging malicious prosecution can proceed against the person who initiated such a false prosecution, under the general civil law. The compensation contemplated under Section 250 Cr.P.C. is a special provision enacted to meet the specific contingencies mentioned therein.”
The Court set aside the compensation ordered against the petitioner.
Case title: S Sukumaran Chettiyar V State of Kerala
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 431
Case number: Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 1356 Of 2005
Counsel for petitioner: Advocate Bindu Sasthamangalam
Counsel for the respondent: Public Prosecutor Prabhakaran C.N.