Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in a writ petition seeking a direction for registration of FIR and investigation into a cognizable offence, the prospective accused is a necessary or proper party and is entitled to notice and hearing before any such direction is issued.
Analysis: The scheme of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 treats registration of FIR and investigation as statutory functions of the police. The legal position affirmed by the Supreme Court is that where the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence, registration of FIR is mandatory, and the accused has no right of prior hearing at the stage of registration or investigation. The rule of audi alteram partem is excluded at this stage because prior notice would frustrate prompt investigation, and the safeguards available to an accused operate at later stages of arrest, investigation, bail, and trial. The writ court, therefore, need not implead or hear the prospective accused before directing registration of FIR or investigation.
Conclusion: The prospective accused is neither a necessary nor a proper party in such a writ petition, and no pre-decisional hearing is required before issuing a direction for registration of FIR and investigation. The answer is in favour of the petitioner.