The Supreme Court on August 14 stayed three paragraphs of the impugned order of the Allahabad High Court, wherein the court directed the Uttar Pradesh police to seek legal opinion from Government counsel prior to registering a First Information Report (FIR) in cases which prima facie appeared to be civil transactions.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol further stayed the High Court’s direction that Magistrates should direct registration of FIR as per Section 156(3) of the CrPC only on satisfaction that no prior civil dispute was pending between the parties.
On April 18, a Allahabad High Court bench of Justices Arvind Singh Sangwan and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra passed certain directions regarding the registration of FIRs.
The court directed that in cases where FIR is sought to be registered under Sections 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust), 408 (criminal breach of trust by clerk or servant), 420, 467, 471 of the IPC and it prima facie appears that the case relates to a commercial or civil dispute, then “opinion will be taken in all such cases from the concerned District Government Counsel / Deputy District Government Counsel in their respective Districts and only after obtaining a report, the F.I.R. will be registered“.
Further, the High Court stated that the directions issued by the court would be applied for the cases where FIR is registered after May 1, 2024. It added that if the police officers have failed to seek a legal opinion in such FIRs, then they may be liable for contempt proceedings.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol while hearing an SLP of the Uttar Pradesh Government challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court, directed: “Operation and implementation of paragraphs 15 to 17 of the impugned order dated 18.4.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition NO. 5948/2024 stand stayed till the next date of listing.“
The paragraphs 15 to 17 states of the impugned order states as follows:
“15. In the light of aforesaid recent judgments of Supreme Court, this Court deem it appropriate to issue direction to the Director General of Police, U.P. to the following effect:-
(i) Where an F.I.R. is sought to be registered under Sections 406, 408, 420 / 467, 471 I.P.C. etc., wherein, on the face of it, it appears that there is a commercial dispute or a civil dispute or a dispute arising out of different types of agreements or partnership deeds, etc. before registration of the F.I.R., an opinion will be taken in all such cases from the concerned District Government Counsel / Deputy District Government Counsel in their respective Districts and only after obtaining a report, the F.I.R. will be registered. Such opinion will be reproduced in concluding part of F.I.R.
(ii) The D.G.P., U.P. will issue necessary instructions to all the S.S.P. in the State of Uttar Pradesh who will further instruct all Station House Officers of their respective police stations to ensure that prior to registration of the F.I.R. where a civil /commercial dispute is apparent, the opinion of the District / Deputy Government Counsel should be taken at the pre-cognizance stage.
(iii) Director Prosecution U.P. will also insure necessary directions to all Government counsels concerned.
(iv) It is made clear that in all cases where first information reports, which are to be registered after 01.05.2024, if no such legal opinion is taken by the concerned police official before registration of the F.I.R., as per (i) and (ii) above they may be liable to contempt proceedings.
(v) This direction will not apply where F.I.R’s. are registered on direction of competent Court under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as these directions relates to pre-cognizance stage.
16. This court is also experiencing that the trial courts while exercising power under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. are virtually acting as post office by just forwarding the complaint to concerned police officer with direction to register the F.I.R.s. This is not the mandate of Lalita Kumari’s case as per paragraph 120.1.
17. Therefore, directions are also issued to all the magistrates in State of U.P. who are exercising power under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to pass an order directing registration of F.I.R./s only after a satisfactory note “after careful perusal of contents of entire complaint and as per affidavit of informant/ complainant no prior civil dispute is pending inter se parties before any court of law, therefore, the Court is convinced that commission of cognizable offence is made out.“– Supreme Court-Allahabad High Court
Case Details: State of U.P. & Ors. v. Sone Lal & Ors, SLP (Crl) Diary No. (s) 24766/2024
#airr #news #airrnews #channel #Legal #case #India #court #highcourt #supremecourt
