Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 188 of indian penal code in Jarnail Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 27 March, 2025Matching Fragments
6. Therefore, we deem it appropriate at the first instance to deal with the cases which pertain to Section 188 IPC simpliciter.
7. The State of Punjab, State of Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh, have furnished the list of the cases registered under Section 188 IPC during the above-said period of Covid-19 Pandemic.
8. Section 188 IPC is reproduced hereunder:-
188. Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant.-- Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his management, disobeys such direction, 3 of 9 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:041913 shall, if such disobedience causes or tends to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any person lawfully employed, be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both;
9. A reference is required to be made to Section 195(1)
(a) Cr.P.C. as it deals with taking cognizance of offence punishable under Section 188 IPC. For ready reference, Section 195(1) (a) Cr.P.C. is reproduced hereunder:-
195. Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence.
XX XX XX
10. It is manifest from a bare reading of Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C. that the Courts shall not take cognizance of a complaint under Section 188 IPC unless it is initiated in writing by the public servant authorized to do so. In the event, the complaint is not made by a public servant, who is authorized to do so, it would not be maintainable.
Reliance can be placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in M.S. Ahlawat vs. State of Haryana, (2000) 1 SCC 278, wherein it was held that the provision of Section 195 Cr.P.C. is mandatory in nature and no Court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of any of the offences mentioned therein unless there is a complaint in writing as required under that Section.
11. Learned counsel for the State of Punjab, the State of Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh, while relying upon the respective affidavits submit that a large number of FIRs, which were registered simpliciter under Section 188 IPC, had been done at the instance of the police and not by a public servant authorized to do so in terms of Section 195 Cr.P.C.
12. It is reiterated that the Covid-19 Pandemic posed an enormous challenge to mankind. It was an extraordinary 5 of 9 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:041913 and unprecedented situation. The law enforcement and other agencies including those maintaining essential services, were overstretched and the general public at large was also facing great hardship as it was a compelling situation. It is apparent that there were instances where people had to venture out of their houses in search of food, medicines or due to other emergent situations and in process, they violated the prohibitory orders issued by the authorities.