Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal GST Officer Froze Business Accounts Without Any Legal Basis, Ignored Taxpayer for Three Months: Bombay High Court Imposes Personal Costs Weapon Recovered, But No Forensic Report, No Independent Witness — Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused

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