1985 (4) TMI 327 - SC - Indian Laws

Magistrate must notify informant before dropping proceedings based on police report. Importance of communication in criminal cases emphasized.

The Court held that a Magistrate must notify the first informant or relatives of the deceased before dropping proceedings based on a police report. The ... - Issues Involved:1. Whether the Magistrate can accept a police report and drop proceedings without issuing notice to the first informant or relatives of the deceased.2. The necessity of referring to specific provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973.3. The rights and interests of the informant in the investigation process.4. The entitlement of the injured person or relatives of the deceased to notice when the report is considered by the Magistrate.Summary:Issue 1: Notice to First Informant or Relatives of the DeceasedThe core issue is whether a Magistrate can accept a police report and drop proceedings without notifying the first informant or the injured, or in case of death, the relatives of the deceased. The Court directed that the petitioner, the father of the deceased Gurinder Kaur, should be heard before any final order is passed on the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) report. This was because the CBI had submitted a report stating no offence appeared to have been committed, and the petitioner was unaware of this submission. The Court emphasized the general importance of this question for criminal proceedings.Issue 2: Provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973The judgment refers to several provisions of the CrPC, 1973, including Sections 154, 156, 157, 173, and 190. These sections outline the process for lodging a First Information Report (FIR), the powers of the police to investigate, and the requirements for notifying the informant about the investigation's progress and outcome.Issue 3: Rights and Interests of the InformantThe Court highlighted that the informant, who lodges the FIR, remains concerned with the investigation's outcome. The informant must be notified of the police's decision not to investigate (u/s 157(2)) and the action taken (u/s 173(2)(ii)). The informant's interest in the investigation's result is recognized by law, and thus, the informant should be given an opportunity to be heard if the Magistrate decides not to take cognizance of the offence or to drop the proceedings.Issue 4: Entitlement of Injured Person or Relatives of the DeceasedThe Court clarified that while the injured person or relatives of the deceased are not entitled to notice from the Magistrate unless they are the informant, they have the locus to appear before the Magistrate and make submissions if they become aware of the report's consideration. The Magistrate may, at his discretion, notify the injured person or relatives, but the absence of such notice does not invalidate the Magistrate's order.Conclusion:The Court concluded that the Magistrate must give notice to the informant and provide an opportunity to be heard before deciding not to take cognizance of the offence or to drop the proceedings. The injured person or relatives of the deceased, while not entitled to notice, can appear and make submissions if they learn about the report's consideration. This judgment is of general importance and should be circulated among Magistrates across the country.