Asmita Kuvalekar | Government Law College, Mumbai | 29th March 2020.
M. SUBRAMANIAM AND ANR V S. JANAKI AND ANR (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 102 OF 2011)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
This Special Leave Petition challenges Madras High Court’s order directing the police to file a FIR against the appellants as well as a final report after due investigation. This order was passed without the appellants having been made party to the proceedings. In granting this leave thereon, the Supreme Court stayed the execution of the High Court’s order.
However, despite the stay, a FIR was lodged. Alleging that this criminal matter has been raised in spite, as a civil proceeding between the parties is pending, the appellants question the legality of the High Court order as well as the FIR made in violation of a stay on the same.
The Supreme Court in this case is called upon to decide whether the High Court made an error in directing the filing of the FIR. It succinctly deliberates upon the Magistrates’ power in such situations.
ISSUE:
- Can a High Court direct the filing of FIR and/or final report after investigation?
JUDGEMENT:
Right at the outset, the Apex Court reproduced pertinent portions of its landmark decision in Sakiri Vasu v State of Uttar Pradesh and os1. It was held in that case that if a petitioner cannot avail of his remedy under Section 154 CrPC because the police are not registering his FIR, he can make a written application to the Superintendent of Police and if still there is delay or refusal to file FIR or dissatisfactory investigation, he can approach the Magistrate under Section 156 (3) CrPC. It is therefore clearly within the Magistrate’s authority to direct and supervise FIR filings as well as fair and proper investigation.
The Court emphasized that Section 156 (3) is an important check of the Magistrate on the working of the police so as to ensure that justice is done and all aggrieved persons can avail of the legal remedies as envisaged by the CrPC.
The Magistrate’s power is independent in nature and can therefore be used to not only order investigations but also reopen them if they have not been dealt with satisfactorily in his/her opinion. Going a step further, the Court clarified that the Section has a wide amplitude and covers all incidental powers necessary for the Magistrate to ensure the sanctity of the legal process.
Lamenting on the excessive number of petitions for filing of FIR and similar directive remedies in the High Courts, this judgement reiterates that the remedy lies with the Magistrate and not in the High Courts. If the situation doesn’t change, there is a grim possibility that High Courts will be flooded with such petitions and will not be able to dedicate themselves to any other issues. To that end, the impugned Madras High Court’s decision and the subsequent FIR were set aside and the parties were directed towards the appropriate Magistrate.
Lastly, expressing concern on the filing of the FIR against the appellants despite a stay order against the same, the Court clarified that civil conflicts should not be given a criminal appearance. On the other hand, the police should not refuse to file FIRs or conduct investigations simply on the grounds of an ongoing civil dispute between the parties.
- (2008) 2 SCC 409
Leave a Reply