2014 (4) TMI 1296 - HC - Indian Laws

Seeking to explain the delay in registration of FIR on the basis of the complaint of the petitioners - HELD THAT - There are occasion to come across cases where the police administration has shown laxity in the matter of registration of first information report and in investigating the same, thereby pushing the aggrieved complainant to knock the doors of the relevant magistrate. It is time for the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata Police (hereafter the CP) insofar as the police officials posted in police stations under his jurisdictional control as well as the Director General and Inspector General of Police (hereafter the DGP) for the police officials posted at police stations beyond the jurisdiction of Kolkata Police to introspect and to take stock of the performance of each of such officers who, despite being aware of the law relating to registration of first information report, simply refuse to register the same on the specious ground that an inquiry is necessary without, however, realizing the situation which would call for an inquiry. It is high time for the police officers to be made aware of the decisions of the Supreme Court as well as this Court on the point of registration of first information report - the DGP and the CP shall take appropriate steps in this regard. Since Mr. Amit Biswas has been transferred from the post of Officer-in-Charge, Entally Police Station on 17 th January, 2014, the present incumbent on such post shall submit a status port regarding progress of investigation of of Entally P.S. Case No.22 dated 15th January, 2014 before this Court on 23rd April, 2014, when this writ petition shall be listed under the heading To Be Mentioned .

Summary

Issues: Delay in registration of FIR, Negligence of police officer, Compliance with Supreme Court decisions on FIR registration

In this judgment by the High Court of Calcutta, the main issue revolves around the delay in the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) by the former Officer-in-Charge of Entally Police Station. The officer explained the delay by stating that an inquiry following the complaint did not substantiate the allegations, hence no FIR was initially registered. However, upon the petitioners' representation, a case was eventually registered under specific sections of the Indian Penal Code. The Court noted that despite the complaint disclosing an offense under Section 354A of the IPC, no case was registered under that section, indicating negligence on the part of the officer. The Court highlighted a recurring problem of police laxity in FIR registration, emphasizing the need for police officials to be aware of Supreme Court decisions on this matter.

The judgment stresses the importance of police officials being diligent in registering FIRs promptly and in accordance with the law. The Court criticized the officer-in-charge for neglecting his duties and failing to register a case under the appropriate section of the IPC. It called for introspection by the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata Police, and the Director General and Inspector General of Police to evaluate the performance of officers who fail to register FIRs without valid reasons. The Court emphasized the need for police officers to be well-versed in the legal requirements for FIR registration and urged the higher authorities to take necessary steps to address this issue.

Regarding the specific case, the Court warned the officer-in-charge to be cautious in handling similar situations in the future. It made it clear that any recurrence of such negligence would not be tolerated. As the officer had been transferred from his position, the current incumbent was directed to provide an update on the investigation progress of the registered case. The Court scheduled a follow-up hearing for this purpose, emphasizing the importance of accountability and timely action in such matters. Additionally, the Court ordered the office to send a copy of the judgment to the Commissioner of Police and the Director General of Police for further action, highlighting the systemic implications of the case beyond the individual officer's conduct.