Annia K Mukhia vs State Of Gujarat on 26 February, 2018

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Annia K Mukhia vs State Of Gujarat on 26 February, 2018

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala

          R/SCR.A/1157/2018                                          ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1157 of 2018

==========================================================
                                 ANNIA K MUKHIA
                                     Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT & 5
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ARIF A SHEKH for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MS MOXA THAKKAR, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================

    CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

                                 Date : 26/02/2018

                                  ORAL ORDER

1 By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has a grievance to redress as regards the inaction on the part of the police authorities in not registering the FIR pursuant to the complaint lodged by the petitioner in writing to the Police Inspector of the Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad dated 23rd January 2018 at Annexure: 'A' to this petition (page: 7).

2 The Police Inspector of the Bopal Police Station shall look into the complaint and take a decision whether the same discloses commission of any cognizable offence or not. After perusal of the complaint and inquiry, if any, the Police Inspector of the Bopal Police Station is of the view that the same discloses commission of a cognizable offence, then, in such circumstances, the First Information Report be registered forthwith. However, if the Police Inspector of the Bopal Police Station is of the view that no case is made out for the registration of the FIR, then, in such circumstances, the petitioner be informed in writing about the same by giving reasons in brief within a period of fortnight from today.

Page 1 of 2

             R/SCR.A/1157/2018                                                     ORDER




3       The attention of the officer concerned is drawn to the following

observations of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others [(2017) 2 SCC 779], as contained in para 8:

"The exceptions that were carved out pertain to medical negligence cases as has been stated in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab [(2005) 6 SCC 1]. The Court also referred to the authorities in P. Sirajuddin v. State of Madras [(1970) 1 SCC 595] and CBI v. Tapan Kumar Singh [(2003) 6 SCC 175] and finally held that what is necessary is only that the information given to the police must disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. In such a situation, registration of an FIR is mandatory. However, if no cognizable offence is made out in the information given, then the FIR need not be registered immediately and perhaps the police can conduct a sort of preliminary verification or inquiry for the limited purpose of ascertaining as to whether a cognizable offence has been committed. But, if the information given clearly mentions the commission of a cognizable offence, there is no other option but to register an FIR forthwith. Other considerations are not relevant at the stage of registration of FIR, such as, whether the information is falsely given, whether the information is genuine, whether the information is credible, etc. At the stage of registration of FIR, what is to be seen is merely whether the information given ex facie discloses the commission of a cognizable offence."

4 With the above direction, this application is disposed of. I clarify that I have otherwise not gone into the merits of the matter. Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) chandresh Page 2 of 2

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court