Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
State of Haryana and others v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others
AIR1992SC604
JUDGES: S.R. Pandian and K. Jayachandra Reddy
Date of Decision: 21/11/1990
FACTS:-
This appeal by grant of special leave is directed by the appellants, namely, the State of Haryana and two others assailing the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana wherein High Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings inclusive of the registration of the Information Report and directed the second respondent, Mr. Dharam Pal to pay the costs to the first respondent, Ch. Bhajan Lal.
ISSUES:-
- What are the requirements to be satisfied by an Officer incharge of a police station before he enters into the realm of investigation of a cognizable offence after the stage of registration of the offence Under Section 154(1).
- Whether the registration of a criminal case Under Section 154(1) of the Code ipso facto warrants the setting in motion of an investigation under Chapter XII of the Code.
- Whether Section 157 of the Code gives the police officers carte blanche drawing no legal bounds in the province of investigation and whether the powers of the police officers in the field of investigation are wholly immune from judicial review ability.
- Whether the order of the Court in quashing the First Information Report and the proceeding of the investigation is legally sustainable and if not, to what extent the said order suffers from legal infirmity.
JUDGMENT:-
Hon’ble Apex Court decided for the first issue that, it is manifestly clear that if any information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before an officer incharge of a police action satisfying the requirements of Section 154(1) of the Code, the police officer has no other option except to enter the substance thereof in the prescribed form, that is to say, to register a case on the basis of such information.
For second issue, it decided that, it is pellucid that the commencement of investigation by a police officer is subject to two conditions, firstly, the police officer should have reason to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence as required by Section 157(1) and secondly, the police officer should subjectively satisfy himself as to whether there is sufficient ground for entering on an investigation even before he starts an investigation into the facts and circumstances of the case as contemplated under Clause (b) of the proviso to Section 157(1) of the Code.
For third issue, it was ruled that, the investigation of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the police officers whose powers in that field are unfettered so long as the power to investigate into the cognizable offences is legitimately exercised in strict compliance with the provisions falling under Chapter XII of the Code and the Courts are not justified in obliterating the track of investigation when the investigating agencies are well within their legal bounds as aforementioned. Indeed, a noticeable feature of the scheme under Chapter XIV of the Code is that a Magistrate is kept in the picture at all stages of the police investigation but he is not authorised to interfere with the actual investigation or to direct the police how that investigation is to be conducted. But if a police officer transgresses the circumscribed limits and improperly and illegally exercises his investigatory powers in breach of any statutory provision causing serious prejudice to the personal liberty and also property of a citizen, then the Court on being approached by the person aggrieved for the redress of any grievance, has to consider the nature and extent of the breach and pass appropriate orders as may be called for without leaving the citizens to the mercy of police echelons since human dignity is a dear value of our Constitution. Needs no emphasis that no one can demand absolute immunity even if he is wrong and claim unquestionable right and unlimited powers exercisable upto unfathomable cosmos
For fourth issue, it was decided that, in the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extra-ordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers Under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
It further noted that, in the following categories of cases, the High Court may in exercise of powers under Article 226 of Constitution or under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may interfere in proceedings relating to cognizable offences to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice:-
- Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima-facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
- Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers Under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
- Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
- Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated Under Section 155(2) of the Code.
- Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
- Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
- Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
But, Hon’ble Court also gave a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the Court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R. or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whim or caprice.
HELD:-
Reverting to the present case, the allegations made in the complaint, do clearly constitute a cognizable offence justifying the registration of a case and an investigation thereon and this case does not fall under any one of the categories of cases formulated above calling for the exercise of extraordinary or inherent powers of the High Court to quash the F.I.R. itself. Consequently, Hon’ble Court set aside that part of the judgment of the High Court quashing the First Information Report.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
