In a significant judgment underscoring the duties of law enforcement, the Supreme Court of India has declared that police officers cannot avoid their duty of registering an FIR when a cognizable offence is disclosed and must act with “absolute and total integrity,” shedding all personal biases. A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma made these strong observations while ordering a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe an assault during the 2023 Akola riots, citing a “patent dereliction of duties” by the Maharashtra Police.
Background of the Case
The case originates from the communal riots in Akola City, Maharashtra, on May 13, 2023. According to the appellant’s petition, while returning home at night, he witnessed four individuals fatally assaulting a person, later identified as Vilas Mahadevrao Gaikwad, with a sword and an iron pipe. The assailants then turned on the appellant, who was 17 at the time, assaulting him on his head and neck and causing him to lose consciousness.
The appellant claimed that his statement was recorded by the police in the hospital. However, despite this and subsequent written complaints to the local police station and the Superintendent of Police, Akola, on June 1, 2023, no FIR was registered concerning the assault on him. The Bombay High Court had dismissed his writ petition, questioning his motives.
Arguments Before the Court
The State of Maharashtra denied that the appellant’s statement was ever recorded, contending that an officer found him medically unfit to speak on May 14, 2023. They argued that the family did not attempt to lodge a report promptly and that the appellant’s claims were not substantiated. The appellant maintained that the police failed in their statutory duty to register an FIR based on the information they possessed, including the hospital’s medico-legal report.
Supreme Court’s Analysis and Findings
The Supreme Court bench found the inaction of the police to be a “total dereliction of duty on his part, be it deliberate or due to sheer carelessness.” The Court noted that the police were aware of the cognizable offense as early as 2:15 AM on May 14, 2023, through the hospital’s medico-legal report.
Reaffirming the principles laid down in the Constitution Bench judgment of Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P. and others, the Court reiterated that registering an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the CrPC if the information discloses a cognizable offense.
The judgment served as a powerful reminder of the standards expected from the police force. The Court stated: “Needless to state, when members of the police force don their uniforms, they are required to shed their personal predilections and biases, be they religious, racial, casteist or otherwise. They must be true to the call of duty attached to their office and their uniform with absolute and total integrity.”
The bench was also highly critical of the Superintendent of Police, Akola, for failing to act on the written complaint sent to him, terming his conduct “indeed a cause for great concern.” The Court concluded that the police authorities “never lived up to the expectation that reposed in them as upholders of the law to take prompt and appropriate action.”
Final Decision
As a result of these findings, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and directed the following:
- The Secretary, Home Ministry, Government of Maharashtra, is to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising senior police officers from both Hindu and Muslim communities.
- The SIT shall register an FIR in connection with the assault upon the appellant and undertake a thorough investigation.
- The Secretary, Home Ministry, shall initiate appropriate disciplinary action against all erring police officials for the “patent dereliction of duties.”
- Measures shall be initiated to instruct and sensitize the police department about their duties under the law.
- The SIT’s investigation report must be submitted to the Supreme Court within three months.
