Chambers of Ishaan Garg
Ch. No. 217, Western Wing, District & Sessions Court, Tis Hazari, New Delhi, Delhi 110054
+91 8851742417, +91 8800386163
Conclusion/Directions
120. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold:
120.1. The registration of FIR is mandatory Under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.
120.2. If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.
120.3. If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.
[Emphasis supplied]
12. The scope of a preliminary inquiry, as clarified in the said judgment, is limited to situations where the information received does not prima facie disclose a cognizable offence but requires verification. However, in cases where the information clearly discloses a cognizable offence, the police have no discretion to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR. The decision in Lalita Kumari (supra) does not create an absolute Rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR. Rather, it reaffirms the settled principle that the police authorities are obligated to register an FIR when the information received prima facie discloses a cognizable offence.
13. In the present case, the allegations against the Appellant pertain to the abuse of official position and corrupt practices while holding public office. Such allegations fall squarely within the category of cognizable offences, and there exists no legal requirement for a preliminary inquiry before the registration of an FIR in such cases. The Appellant's contention that successive FIRs have been registered against him with an ulterior motive is a matter that can be examined during the course of investigation and trial. The Appellant has adequate remedies under the law, including the right to seek quashing of frivolous FIRs Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, the right to apply for bail, and the right to challenge any illegal actions of the investigating authorities before the appropriate forum.
14. Further, this Court cannot issue a blanket direction restraining the registration of FIRs against the Appellant or mandating a preliminary inquiry in all future cases involving him. Such a direction would not only be contrary to the statutory framework of the Code of Criminal Procedure but would also amount to judicial overreach. As rightly observed by the High Court, courts cannot rewrite statutory provisions or introduce additional procedural safeguards that are not contemplated by law.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 1313 of 2025.
Decided On: 17.03.2025
Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Vikram Nath and P.B. Varale, JJ.
Author: Vikram Nath, J.
Citation: 2025 INSC 350,MANU/SC/0346/2025.
