Supreme Court quashes 2015 FIR against man accused of assaulting public servants

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed a 2015 FIR against a man for allegedly assaulting on-duty public servants, saying the investigation of the alleged offence suffered from legal infirmities from the initial stage.

A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh was hearing an appeal against a September 2023 Allahabad High Court order rejected a plea against the Varanasi's chief judicial magistrate's direction to initiate criminal proceedings against appellant B N John.

"We are satisfied that the appellant has been able to make out the case for quashing the criminal proceedings pending against the appellant before the CJM, Varanasi," the bench said.

It noted that nothing was mentioned in the FIR for any specific act under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 353 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from discharge of duty) and that it only said that John and his associates were "creating a disturbance".

Regarding a second alleged offence under IPC section 186 (obstructing a public servant in discharge of public functions), the apex court said no complaint was registered or filed before a magistrate or court about it.

"The written complaint filed by the district probation officer was not to a judicial magistrate but to an executive magistrate, hence was not valid," the bench said.

It said the statements recorded later under section 161 (examination of witnesses by police) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) appeared as an "afterthought" and even these statements regarding the attack or assault had "bald" and "generalised" allegations.

"Unlike in the case of section 186 of the IPC, where voluntarily obstructing any public servant in discharge of his official function is sufficient to invoke the said section, in the case of the offence under section 353 of the IPC, not only obstruction but actual use of criminal force or assault on the public servant is necessary," the court said.

It added that the FIR did not mention how the disturbance was created -- whether because of assault or use of criminal force.

"What is evident from the records is that the police entertained the FIR under Section 353 of the IPC and investigated the same by conferring jurisdiction upon itself as if it was a cognisable offence, (even) when the commission of any cognisable offence was not made out in the FIR, which is not permissible in law," the court said.

It said the police added IPC Section 186 later and the CJM took cognisance of both offences even when no public servant filed a complaint in any court.

"Where the investigation of the cognisable office itself suffers from legal infirmities and without jurisdiction from the initial stage, the entire investigation would be vitiated," the court said.

"We are of the opinion that taking cognisance by the CJM, Varanasi, of the offences under sections 353 and 186 of the IPC was not done by following the due process contemplated under the provisions of law and accordingly, the same being contrary to law, all the orders passed pursuant thereto cannot be sustained and would warrant interference from this court," it added.