State of Punjab v. Raj Singh, (SC) BS39897

State of Punjab v. Raj Singh, (SC) BS39897 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- M.K. Mukherjee and K.T. Thomas, JJ.

Criminal Appeal No. 82 of 1998 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2053). D/d. 16.1.1998.

State of Punjab - Appellant

Versus

Raj Singh - Respondents

For the Appellant :- Mr. G.S. Dhillon, Addl. Advocate General, with Mr. Darshan and Mr. R.S. Sodhi, Advocates.

For the Respondent :- Mr. N.D. Garg, Advocate.

NOTE

Section 340 Criminal Procedure Code- Even if the offence is committed in the court, the police can investigate the case and then the court can forward the report to the competent court alongwith the forwarding letter treating it as complaint.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 195(1)(b) - Cognizable offence committed in or in relation to proceedings in court - FIR lodged with Police by the party - Police has power to investigate into the offence - Power of Police is not circumscribed by Section 195 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - However, when challan is submitted on completion of investigation, the court would not be competent to take cognizance in view of embargo of Section 195(1)(b), but nothing therein deters the court from filing a complaint for the offence on the basis of FIR and the materials collected during investigation, provided it forms the requisite opinion and follows the procedure laid down in Section 340 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 1983(1) RCR (Criminal) (SC) 354 distinguished.

[Para 2]

Cases Referred :-

Gopal Krishna Menon and Anr. v. D. Raja Reddy, 1983(2) RCR (Criminal) 354 : AIR 1983 Supreme Court 1053.

ORDER

M.K. Mukherjee, J. - Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. We are unable to sustain the impugned order of the High Court quashing the F.I.R. lodged against the respondents alleging commission of offences under sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 Indian Penal Code by them in course of the proceeding of a civil suit, on the ground that Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Criminal Procedure Code prohibited entertainment of and investigation into the same by the police. From a plain reading of Section 195 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 it is manifest that it comes into operation at the stage when the Court intends to take cognizance of an offence under Section 190(1) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; and it has nothing to do with the statutory power of the police to investigate into an F.I.R. which discloses a cognisable offence, in accordance with Chapter XII of the Code even if the offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in Court. In other words, the statutory power of the Police to investigate under the Code is not in any way controlled or circumscribed by Section 195 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 It is of course true that upon the charge-sheet (challan), if any, filed on completion of the investigation into such an offence the Court would not be competent to take cognizance thereof in view of the embargo of section 195(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 but nothing therein deters the Court from filing a complaint for the offence on the basis of the F.I.R. (filled by the aggrieved private party) and the materials collected during investigation, provided it forms the requisite opinion and follows the procedure laid down in Section 340 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 The judgment of this Court in Gopal Krishna Menon and Anr. v. D. Raja Reddy, 1983(1) RCR (Criminal) 354 : AIR 1983 Supreme Court 1053, on which the High Court relied, has no manner of application to the facts of the instant case for there cognizance was taken on a private complaint even though the offence of forgery was committed in respect of a money receipt produced in the Civil Court and hence it was held that the Court could not take cognizance on such a complaint in view of Section 195 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

For the foregoing reasons, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order.

Appeal allowed.