Skip to main content

Petitions seeking direction to register FIR pile up

Getting a first information report (FIR) registered at police stations has become something of a headache in many cases. Complainants are forced to knock the doors of the court to obtain direction to police to conduct enquiry and register a case if a cognizable offence is made out.

Though it is the duty of police to file an FIR based on a complaint raised by the petitioner, many police officers are reportedly reluctant to take the complaints forward for reasons best known to them. Affected petitioners on the condition of anonymity alleged that police officers dragged the case either to demand bribe or to keep crime rates down. As a result, many petitioners are forced to move court.

In an order dated March 26, 2015, Madurai bench of Madras high court judge C T Selvam directed Trichy city, Trichy rural and Pudukkottai police, among some other southern districts, to file FIR on the complaints filed by 35 people.

The superintendent of police, Manikandam police, Kattuputhur police and Musiri police of the district were directed to file cases on complaints from six petitioners. Trichy police commissioner was also given a direction to register cases with regard to complaint filed by one person. Regunathapuram police, Vallathirakottai police and Thirukkokarnam police of the Pudukkottai district police were also asked to register cases based on complaints from six people.

Complainants alleged police would file cases for grave offences and take action. But they would try to avoid filing cases and will attempt to bring out a compromise between the parties in complaints related to vehicle theft, marital disputes, assault, criminal intimidation in civil cases, burglary, chain snatching etc. However, not everyone can afford the fees for getting a direction from the court. Ultimately, justice is denied.

Higher police officials denied there was any hidden agenda behind the refusal to file the case. "Many civil dispute cases with false allegations of criminal offence are dragged into police station. Since no cognizable offence is made out, we don't register the case. On receiving the court direction, we file an FIR and then investigate into the matter," Trichy superintendant of police S Rajeswari told TOI.

But plenty of petitions seeking court direction to file FIR have accumulated at the Madurai bench of Madras high court and not all of them are related to civil disputes.

City commissioner of police (CoP) Sanjay Mathur said he had always instructed his officers to file a case if a cognizable offence was found. "I have given stern instructions to police stations to file an FIR if the cognizable offence was made out because we are here to help the genuine people," he said.

TOI's enquiry revealed that there had been several instances where the complainants were forced to bribe the investigation officer to file an FIR. Unwilling to give the bribe, some moved the court.

"More people are being driven to file petition in the high court seeking direction to have a case registered. The respective heads of police should ensure that the FIR should be filed so that the people will be prevented from running from pillar to post. If further investigation confirms there was no commission of crime, they can close the case citing mistake of facts," said secretary of consumer protection council of Tamil Nadu, Trichy S Pushpavanam.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/trichy/Petitions-seeking-direction-to-register-FIR-pile-up/articleshow/47126379.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Flat owner without legal title has consumer rights

In a significant judgment, the South Mumbai Consumer Forum has held that a flat owner legally occupying the flat would be a consumer, even if his title to the flat might be in dispute before a competent court. Thurlow owned a flat in a co-operative society. Appuswami was residing with him. In 1976, Appuswami got married in the same flat, and his wife started residing in the same flat. They had three children, born and brought up in the same flat. After Thurlow expired in 2004, Appuswami approached the High Court for inheritance to Thurlow's estate but expired while the matter was pending. His wife and children were brought on record. Subsequently, the society intervened, contending Appuswami did not have any right to the flat and it should be handed over to the Society. The Appuswami family continued to reside in the flat, and even pay the society's outgoings and maintenance charges. Later, the society stopped collecting maintenance charges from all members, as it earned...

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subs...