Jagtar Singh vs Union Territory Chandigarh

Swatanter Kumar, J. (Oral)

The only question in this case is with regard to interpretation of Section 195(1) of Code of Criminal Produce. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the present case a complaint was made by the public servant (District Magistrate) under Section 188 of Indian Penal Code to the concerned police station. After investigation challan was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate concerned along with the copy of the complaint made by the public servant to the police officer.

These facts are not disputed. Language of Section 195(1) of the Code does not leave scope for any ambiguity and is the section which has to be construed strictly. In accordance with the settled principles of interpretation applicable to criminal jurisprudence the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code or penal laws have to be strictly construed so as to be given meaning except what is intended by the Legislature in the language used itself. The relevant portion of Section is that, "No court shall take cognizance except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate". The intention appears to be clear that where an offence is committed under Section 188 I.P.C., the Legislature has made it obligatory that the public servant before whom such an offence is committed, he will file a complaint to the Magistrate and the cognizance of the offence by the concerned Court is dependent upon the complaint in writing by such officer or an officer superior to such officer.

The counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Sawaran Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1994(3) Recent CR. 352 and Bhagat Ram v. The State of Punjab, 1991(1) Recent CR 192 . In both these cases the Court has indicated that the scope of Section 195(1) of the Code does not contemplate investigation in a normal way by the police and filing of the challan, but the complaint has to be presented directly to the concerned Court. In the present case though the complaint is stated to be addressed to the Court, but as it appears it was not presented to the Court and the Court did not pass any orders at that stage.

In these circumstances the petition is allowed. F.I.R. No. 217 dated 13.11.1990 in the Police Station, Section 39, Chandigarh, under Section 188 I.P.C. is hereby quashed. All the proceedings taken upon the said F.I.R. shall also be deemed to have been quashed. It is further directed that it will not, in any way, affect the right of the public servant to present the complaint to the competent Court of jurisdiction, if permissible in law.