Madhya Pradesh High Court
Faaiz Hasan Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2024
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1 M.Cr.C.6331/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 27th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6331 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
FAAIZ HASAN KHAN S/O AKBAR
HASAN KHAN, AGED ABOUT 28
YEARS, RESIDENT OF RIYAZ
MANZIL KHANUGAON PS KOHE-
FIZA TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MOHD. ADIL USMANI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH POLICE STATION KOHE
FIZA DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI MOHAN SAUSARKAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
...................................................................................................
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed
the following:
ORDER
This application under section 482 of CrPC has been filed
seeking quashment of FIR dated 28.11.2022, registered at Police
Station Koh-e-Fiza, District Bhopal against the applicant for
offences under sections 195-A, 294 and 506 of IPC in Crime
No.711/2020.
2. It is submitted by counsel for applicant that not only the
allegations made in the FIR are false, but since a complaint is
required to be filed for offence under section 195-A of IPC,
therefore, the registration of FIR for the said offence is bad in law.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.
4. From the arguments advanced by the applicant it is clear that
bad blood is going on between the parties and FIRs are being lodged
by them against each other.
5. This Court while exercising the power under section 482 of
CrPC can consider the uncontroverted allegations only and cannot
look into the correctness of the allegations.
6. So far as the submission made by the counsel for applicant that
in fact a separate offence should have been filed under section 195-A
of IPC is concerned, in view of section 2(d) of CrPC the same is
misconceived.
7. Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. reads as under:-
"2. Definitions.- In this Code, unless the
context otherwise requires,-
(a) xxx
(b) xxx
(c) xxx
(d) "complaint" means any allegation made
orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a
view to his taking action under this Code, that
some person, whether known or unknown,
has committed an offence, but does not
include a police report.
Explanation.- A report made by a
police officer in a case which discloses, after
investigation, the commission of a non-
cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a
complaint; and the police officer by whom
such report is made shall be deemed to be the
complainant;
8. Therefore, it is clear that even if a chargesheet is filed in
respect of a non-cognizable offence, then the same shall be deemed
to be a complaint and the police officer by whom such report is
made, shall be deemed to be a complainant.
9. Furthermore, as per First Schedule of CrPC, section 195-A of
IPC is a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of 7 years
or fine or both.
10. So far as the bar contained under section 195-A of CrPC is
concerned, it is applicable to the witnesses only; whereas section
195-A of IPC is concerned, this offence will be made out for
threatening any person to give false evidence.
11. Furthermore, even assuming that for offence under section
195-A of IPC is concerned, a complaint can be filed, still when one
offence discloses commission of cognizable offence as well as non-
cognizable offence, then the police can investigate all the offences
including that of non-cognizable offence.
12. The Supreme Court in the case of Ushaben Vs. Kishorbhai
Chunilal Talpada and Others reported in (2012) 6 SCC 353 has
held as under:-
"14. We must now turn to Section 198-A of
the Code. It reads thus:
"198-A. Prosecution of
offences under Section 498-A of
the Penal Code, 1860.--No court
shall take cognizance of an
offence punishable under Section
498-A of the Penal Code, 1860
except upon a police report of
facts which constitute such
offence or upon a complaint
made by the person aggrieved by
the offence or by her father,
mother, brother, sister or by her
father's or mother's brother or
sister or, with the leave of the
court, by any other person related
to her by blood, marriage or
adoption."
15. A conjoint reading of the above
provisions makes it clear that a complaint
under Section 494 IPC must be made by the
aggrieved person. Section 498-A does not fall
in Chapter XX IPC. It falls in Chapter XX-A.
Section 198-A which we have quoted
hereinabove, permits a court to take
cognizance of offence punishable under
Section 498-A upon a police report of facts
which constitute offence. It must be borne in
mind that all these provisions relate to
cognizance of the offence by the court.
16. "Complaint" is defined under Section 2(d)
of the Code. The definition reads as under:
"2.(d) 'complaint' means
any allegation made orally or in
writing to a Magistrate, with a
view to his taking action under
this Code, that some person,
whether known or unknown, has
committed an offence, but does
not include a police report.
Explanation.--A report
made by a police officer in a case
which discloses, after
investigation, the commission of
a non-cognizable offence shall be
deemed to be a complaint; and
the police officer by whom such
report is made shall be deemed to
be the complainant;"
(emphasis supplied)
Explanation to Section 2(d) makes it clear
that a report made by a police officer after
investigation of a non-cognizable offence is
to be treated as a complaint and the officer by
whom such a report is made is to be deemed
to be the complainant.
17. The above provisions lead us to conclude
that if a complaint contains allegations about
commission of offence under Section 498-A
IPC which is a cognizable offence, apart from
allegations about the commission of offence
under Section 494 IPC, the court can take
cognizance thereof even on a police report.
18. Reliance placed by the High Court on its
earlier judgment in Babubhai Madhavlal
Patel v. State of Gujarat,(1969) 1 Cri LJ 567
(Guj) is misplaced. In that case, the High
Court was dealing with all the offences falling
under Chapter XX IPC. Initially, the accused
were charged under Section 417 read with
Section 114 IPC. That charge was given a go-
by and a fresh charge in respect of Sections
493 to 496 IPC was framed. These offences
fall in Chapter XX IPC. Therefore, the High
Court held that cognizance thereof can be
taken by the Magistrate only on the basis of
complaint filed under Section 190(1)(a) of the
Code by an aggrieved person. That judgment
cannot be applied to the present case. Facts of
that case were different and there the High
Court was dealing with cognizance of the
offences falling under Chapter XX by the
Magistrate.
19. The upshot of the above discussion is that
no fetters can be put on the police preventing
them from investigating the complaint which
alleges offence under Section 498-A IPC and
also offence under Section 494 IPC. In the
circumstances, the appeal must succeed. The
impugned order is set aside. Obviously,
therefore, the direction to delete Section 494
IPC is set aside. The police shall investigate
the complaint in accordance with law."
13. Accordingly, in the light of law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the case of Ushaben (supra), no case is made out
warranting interference.
14. The petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S.AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
TG/-
TRUPTI GUNJAL
2024.03.13
16:26:31 +05'30'
