Motor Insurance Policy Covers Cross-Border Travel If Specifically Authorized By Valid Permit Under MVA: Supreme Court Petrol Pumps Act As 'Commission Agents' For Mahanagar Gas, Liable To Pay Service Tax Under Business Auxiliary Service: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Dilute 'Bangalore Water Supply' Ratio, Affirms Worker Protection Remains The Core Of Industrial Disputes Act Order XXII Rule 9(3) CPC | Application Under Section 5 Limitation Act Must Be Filed Separately To Condonate Delay In Setting Aside Abatement: Supreme Court Principle Of Parity | Supreme Court Extends Benefit Of Fixed-Term Sentence To Co-Accused Based On Remission Period Right To Catch Fish Amounts To 'Profit à Prendre' And Is Compulsorily Registrable As A Lease Under Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act: Supreme Court Supreme Court Mandates Adoption Of Guidelines To Inculcate Sensitivity And Compassion In Judicial Processes For Sexual Offences 'Last Seen' Circumstance Is Weak Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused PSEB | Pre-Regularization Service Must Be Counted As Qualifying Service For Pensionary Benefits: Supreme Court Writ Of Quo Warranto Cannot Be Used For Redress Of Personal Grievances By Unsuccessful Candidates In Selection Process: Supreme Court 'Case Of No Investigation': Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Citing 'Shoddy' Police Work And Lack Of Forensic Evidence 'Status Quo Cannot Be Vacated Without Appropriate Security': Supreme Court Directs Additional ₹200 Crores Deposit In RAKIA-Matrix Case SARFAESI Act | 'Bank' As Assignee Can Invoke Recovery Measures Even If Debt Was Originally Created By Non-Notified Financial Institution: Supreme Court 'CBI Failed Miserably': Supreme Court Tears Into 'Fabricated' Case, Acquits Bank Manager In 35-Year-Old Corruption Trial Mere Delay In Tax Deposit Cannot Be Equated With Non-Payment: Supreme Court Quashes Penalty On Saudi Arabian Airlines Revisional Power Under Section 56 Karnataka Land Revenue Act Cannot Be Invoked Beyond Three-Year Limitation Period: Supreme Court Prosecution Can’t Use Known Locations To Create 'Discovery' Fiction: Supreme Court Rejects Site Plan As Evidence Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage And Long-Term Separation Constitute Valid Grounds For Divorce Under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA: Supreme Court 'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Is A Guideline And Not A Fetish': Supreme Court Acquits Man In 2007 Murder Case Over Fragile Circumstantial Evidence Plea Of Juvenility Is A Jurisdictional Fact; High Court Must Recall Final Judgments Under Section 482 CrPC To Remedy Miscarriage Of Justice: Supreme Court SEBI | Professional Clearing Members Have No Statutory Obligation To Verify Credit/Debit Positions Of Individual Clients Of Trading Members: Supreme Court

It Would Amount to Dereliction of Duty: Jharkhand High Court Directs Police to Register FIR in Case of Brutal Assault on Petitioner

05 September 2024 5:24 AM

By: Admin


In a critical judgment that reiterates the importance of registering FIRs in cases involving cognizable offences, the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has mandated the immediate filing of an FIR in the case of Pooja Giri, who suffered brutal assault by police authorities.

Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, hearing the case, observed, “It is impermissible and it would also amount to dereliction of duty, upon the police officer who has not complied with the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

The case revolved around the petitioner Pooja Giri, who had filed for an FIR to be registered regarding a brutal assault by In-charge of Sadar Police Station, Niranjan Tiwari. Despite clear evidence and a medical report confirming eight different injuries on the petitioner’s body, the police had failed to register an FIR.

Advocate Suraj Singh, representing the petitioner, argued that this was a violation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, which mandates the registration of FIRs for cognizable offences.

The state counsel, Mr. P.C. Sinha, argued that the petitioner had alternative remedies available and that an FIR for the murder of the petitioner’s brother was already under investigation.

Rejecting the state’s arguments, the judge cited, “This is unfortunate that a citizen has been compelled to move before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for registration of the FIR.”

The Court directed the Director General of Police, State of Jharkhand, and the Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, to register an FIR forthwith. It also instructed that Circular/SOP be issued to all Station House Officers to scrupulously follow the guidelines set in Lalita Kumari’s case.

The judgment serves as a timely reminder for police authorities to adhere strictly to the law, and it underscores the significance of the judiciary in upholding the rule of law.

Date of Decision: 07/15.09.2023

Pooja Giri  vs The State of Jharkhand

Latest Legal News