Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Police cannot register crime under Section 195 A of IPC- Kerala HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court in Kerala has ruled that a police officer cannot register a crime related to an offense under Section 195A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Instead, the procedure under Section 195, read with Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), must be followed. The decision was made by a bench of Justice A. Badharudeen, who was considering an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The specific allegation in this case was that the accused had threatened the defacto complainant by posing as a police officer and warning that a separate quotation would be given against him. The police had registered the crime, alleging offenses under Sections 195A of the IPC and Section 120(O) of the Kerala Police Act.

The issue before the bench was whether the bar under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Cr.P.C. applied to offenses under Section 195A of the IPC, which was introduced in 2006. Referring to the case of Radhakrishnan P. v. State of Kerala and Others, the bench found that offenses under Sections 167 and 195A of the IPC were interwoven with and inseparable from the offense under Section 193 and therefore subject to the prohibition under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Cr.P.C.

The High Court noted that Section 195A of the IPC is a cognizable offense under the Criminal Procedure Code, which grants police the power to investigate the case under Section 156 of the Cr.P.C. The bench also highlighted that a police report is not considered a complaint, as defined under Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C.

Therefore, any allegation made orally or in writing to a magistrate with the intention of taking action under the code is considered a complaint, except for a police report.

The High Court held that police cannot register a crime related to an offense under Section 195A of the IPC, and that the procedure under Section 195, read with Section 340 of the Cr.P.C., should be followed. The court observed that all other offenses dealt with under Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. are non-cognizable, and therefore, when the threat dealt with in Section 195 of the IPC involves giving false evidence, it is a matter for the court to consider. Consequently, the court ruled that the police's registration of the crime under Section 195A of the IPC was invalid in law.

However, since the police had also registered a crime under Section 120(O) of the Kerala Police Act, the investigation in this regard can proceed.

The petitioner in this case was arrested on December 11, 2022, and was accused of threatening the defacto complainant over the phone with dire consequences since the defacto complainant offered to act as an approver in a case involving an offense under Section 302 of the IPC. The public prosecutor argued that if the petitioner were released on bail, he would repeat the offense and threaten witnesses in court. The High Court, therefore, refused to grant bail to the petitioner.

In conclusion, the High Court held that police officers cannot register a crime related to an offense under Section 195A of the IPC and that the procedure under Section 195, read with Section 340 of the Cr.P.C., must be followed. The court refused to grant bail to the petitioner in this case.

Suni @ Sunil v. State of Kerala 

Latest Legal News