Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 596 (AP)

Bandi Parasuramudu v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-09-03

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

body2021
ORDER : Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. 1. This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is filed seeking quash of F.I.R. in Crime No. 45 of 2020 of Atmakur Police Station, Anantapur District, registered under Section 107 Cr.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 3. It is a strange case where the 2nd respondent-Station House Officer of Atmakur Police Station registered F.I.R. in Crime 45 of 2020 under Section 107 Cr.P.C. 4. The Chapter VIII of Cr.P.C. deals with security for keeping the peace and good behavior. It contains Sections 106 to 124. Section 107 thereof speaks that on receipt of information that any person is likely to commit breach of peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of peace or disturb the public tranquility and Executive Magistrate, who is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, that he may require the said person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate may think fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. Thereafter, certain procedure is prescribed under the remaining provisions of the said Chapter to cause inquiry and ultimately an order is required to be passed under Section 111 Cr.P.C., which mandates that a Magistrate, acting under 107 Cr.P.C., if deems it fit if necessary to require any person to show cause under such Section, pass an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received and the amount of the bond to be executed, and the terms for which it is to be in force, and the number of sureties required. Thereafter, inquiry under Section 116 Cr.P.C. needs to be conducted and a final order as required under law is to be passed by the concerned Magistrate. Therefore, in the scheme of Cr.P.C., considering the object of the provisions enacted in Chapter VIII of Cr.P.C., it is now clear that the said proceedings are not penal in nature and are only preventive in nature, which are to be initiated to prevent possible breach of peace or disturbance of public tranquility. Therefore, in the scheme of Cr.P.C., considering the object of the provisions enacted in Chapter VIII of Cr.P.C., it is now clear that the said proceedings are not penal in nature and are only preventive in nature, which are to be initiated to prevent possible breach of peace or disturbance of public tranquility. Therefore, it is not contemplated under law that an F.I.R. needs to be registered to initiate the said proceedings. It is not an offence for which the F.I.R. is to be registered. 5. A reading of Section 154 Cr.P.C. makes it manifest that only when the information that is furnished to the police discloses commission of a cognizable offence, then only police is required to register an F.I.R. under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Even in a case relating to non-cognizable offence, the police have to first obtain prior permission from the concerned Magistrate and register an F.I.R. and then proceed according to law. So, basically the law contemplates registration of F.I.R. only when the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence. The information relating to likelihood of committing breach of peace or disturbance of public tranquility does not relate to any commission of offence under any provision of Indian Penal Code and therefore, no F.I.R. for the proceedings related to Section 107 Cr.P.C. is required to be registered. 6. Oblivious of the said fundamental principles of law, to the surprise of this Court, the 2nd respondent registered an F.I.R. in the above Crime No. 45 of 2020 under Section 107 Cr.P.C. The said registration of F.I.R. under Section 107 Cr.P.C. is ex facie illegal on the face of it and clearly unsustainable under law. 7. Before parting with the case, it needs a mention that this Court is coming across several cases where police in the State of Andhra Pradesh have been registering F.I. Rs. for the proceedings related to Sections 107 and 145 Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is high time to give a necessary direction to the authorities at the helm of affairs to take steps to curb such registration of F.I.Rs. for the proceedings under Sections 107 and 145 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the Director General of Police of State of Andhra Pradesh shall take necessary steps in this regard to instruct the Station House Officers of all Police Stations in the State that F.I.R. cannot be registered for the proceedings under Sections 107 and 145 Cr.P.C. 8. for the proceedings under Sections 107 and 145 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the Director General of Police of State of Andhra Pradesh shall take necessary steps in this regard to instruct the Station House Officers of all Police Stations in the State that F.I.R. cannot be registered for the proceedings under Sections 107 and 145 Cr.P.C. 8. In view of the above discussion, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the aforesaid F.I.R. in Crime No. 45 of 2020 of Atmakur Police Station, Anantapur District, registered under Section 107 Cr.P.C., is hereby quashed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.