ZERO FIR is Mandatory in Cognizable Offence irrespective of their Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

Kritika Pandey | Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda | 1st January 2020

Kirti Vashisht Vs. State & Ors. CRL.M.C., 5933/2019

FACTS:

• The respondent no.7 filed a complaint (hereinafter referred to as ‘The First Complaint’) against the petitioner alleging forgery before the respondent no.5/S.H.O. P.S. Najafgarh in regard to one plot and on the said complaint, detailed enquiry was conducted by the respondent no.5/S.H.O. P.S. Najafgarh, during which the petitioner was thoroughly inquired and after the said enquiry, the above mentioned complaint was finally closed by the respondent no.5/S.H.O. P.S. Najafgarh.
• Again Respondent No.7 for the second time filed an exactly same complaint alleging the same facts (as alleged in the first complaint) before respondent no.6/S.H.O. P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar, Najafgarh against the petitioner with regard to the same plot. On receipt of the second complaint, the petitioner was duly called for enquiry by the concerned I.O. of respondent no.6/ S.H.O. P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar, Najafgarh, wherein the petitioner informed the I.O. concerned about the closure of the similar complaint(first complaint) on the same facts filed by respondent no.7 before P.S. Najafgarh i.e. respondent no.5. The petitioner, thereafter, was never called for any further enquiry by the concerned I.O of the respondent no.6/S.H.O. P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar, till date.
• Again third time, Respondent No.7, filed an exactly same complaint alleging the same facts (as alleged in the first complaint and the second complaint against the petitioner in regard to the same plot). The petitioner was again called for the third time, for enquiry by the concerned I.O. of respondent no.5/ S.H.O. P.S. Najafgarh, during which the petitioner again informed the I.O. concerned about the closure of the similar two complaints mentioned above. The petitioner, thereafter, was never called for any further enquiry by the I.O. concerned of respondent no.5/S.H.O. P.S. Najafgarh till date.
• Again Respondent No.7 for the fourth time filed an exactly same complaint alleging the same facts in the above three complaints.
• The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.4/I.O. called the petitioner for joining enquiry on the fourth complaint of the respondent no.7. The petitioner duly explained to the respondent no.4/IO, that similar complaints on exactly same facts (as alleged in first complaint, second complaint and third complaint) were filed by respondent no.7 and informed him about the fate and stage of the said complaints, but the respondent no.4/IO deceitfully did not pay any heed to the information given by the petitioner and in turn, threatened the petitioner in most inhuman way to face serious consequences if the petitioner failed to meet the demands of money as bribe by respondent no.7.
• Moreover, the petitioner was made to sit in the police station from 05:30 pm to 11:00 pm and was subjected to unnecessary questions by the S.H.O. P.S. Kapashera. His conduct was rude towards the petitioner and he used abusive language while addressing him. The respondent no.7 and her brother, were made to sit in the office of the S.H.O. as well during this time.
• Learned APP has fairly conceded that as per the contents of the complaint, cognizable offence is made out. Thus, even on the first complaint made to Police Station, Najafgarh, the FIR was supposed to be registered. As per section 154 Cr.P.C., if any information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is received by any Police Station, the said Police Station is duty bound to register the FIR. However, if the crime is not occurred in the jurisdiction of the said Police Station, then after registering the ‘Zero FIR’, the same has to be transferred to the concerned Police Station for investigation, where the offence has been committed. However, neither this happened in the Police Station Najafgarh nor thereafter in Police Station Baba Hari Das Nagar and also nor in Police Station Kapashera as well.

HELD:

• The High Court direct the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to issue circular order to all the Police Stations in NCT of Delhi and all concerned that if complaint of cognizable offence is received in a Police Station, and offence occurred in jurisdiction of other Police Station, in that case, the ‘Zero FIR’ shall be lodged by the Police Station which has received the complaint and thereafter shall be transferred to the concerned Police Station.