Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

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