Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 188 of indian penal code in Amitabh Choudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 March, 2022Matching Fragments
7. He further submitted that considering the allegations made in the present case, the offence under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code is also not made out as the basic ingredients of the offence under 188 of the Indian Penal Code are not satisfied.
8. The learned counsel further submitted that as per the provisions Section 195 of Cr.P.C., no court shall take cognizance of offence, unless a complaint petition is filed by the person who is either superior or the person who had issued the prohibitory order. Learned counsel submitted that in the present case, prohibitory order was issued by the S.D.O. and the F.I.R. has been lodged by the Block Animal Husbandry Officer, who was deputed as the Magistrate. He submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the cognizance could not have been taken under Section 188 IPC.
23. In the present case, cognizance of the offence under Sections 143 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 126(1)(a) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 has been taken against the petitioner on the basis of police report dated 11.03.2014 submitted by the Block Animal Husbandry Officer, Angara, Ranchi.
Offence under Section 188 I.P.C.
24. Accordingly, Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. prohibits a court from taking cognizance of the offence punishable, interalia, under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, except on a complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Further, it is not in dispute that offence under Section 188 IPC is a cognizable offence.
31. This Court is of the considered view that there was no bar in institution of F.I.R in the present case, but so far as cognizance of offence under Section 188 Indian Penal Code is concerned, the same having not been taken on a complaint, the order taking cognizance under Section 188 Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. However, it is made clear that it will still be open to the competent authority to file a complaint on the basis of the F.I.R and the materials collected during investigation and learned court below shall proceed in accordance with law. Offence under section 143 I.P.C.
42. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that, ex-facie, offence under Section 126(1)(a) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 is not at all made out against the petitioner and consequently, the order taking cognizance so far it relates to offence under Section 126 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, is set-aside to the aforesaid extent.
1343. Accordingly, the impugned order taking cognizance dated 03.09.2014 / 09.05.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi arising out of Angara P.S. Case No. 23 of 2014 dated 11.03.2014 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1449 of 2014 is set aside to the extent it relates to offence under Section 126 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 and offence under Section 188 IPC. Since cognizance under section 188 IPC has been set-aside on technical grounds, the concerned authorities may proceed in accordance with law as already indicated above. As a result, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is partly allowed.