The Supreme Court has ruled that trial courts cannot be approached directly for seeking police investigation into cognisable offences without first exhausting remedies available with the police authorities. In a significant judgment, the top court has clarified that complainants must first try to get the FIR registered at the police station and, if refused, escalate to the Superintendent of Police before moving the magistrate.
A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti, while interpreting Sections 154, 156 and 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), held that a Magistrate should not ordinarily entertain an application under Section 156(3) CrPC unless the informant has exhausted the remedies under Section 154(3).
“A magistrate ought not ordinarily entertain an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) directly unless the informant has availed and exhausted his remedies provided under Section 154(3) of the Code,” the bench stated.
Justice Mithal, writing the judgment in a cross-case, emphasized that the criminal law is structured to first operate at the police level. “It is well recognized in law that the person aggrieved must first exhaust the alternative remedies available to him in law before approaching the court of law. In other words, he cannot ordinarily approach the court directly,” he observed.
The Court underlined a step-by-step process:
- First, the informant must approach the officer-in-charge of the jurisdictional police station to lodge an FIR.
- If refused, the informant may move an application before the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3).
- Only if both fail, the person may then seek directions from the Magistrate under Section 156(3) for investigation or move under Section 190 for cognisance.
“It is crystal clear that an informant who wants to report about a commission of a cognisable offence has to, in the first instance, approach the officer-in-charge of the police station for setting the criminal law into motion by lodging an FIR,” the Court said.
The bench clarified that only if the SHO and the SP both refuse to act, can the complainant “move the court — the magistrate concerned — to get the FIR registered and lodged with the concerned police station.”
