Just a moment...
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 the police was bound to register a case on a complaint disclosing a cognizable offence under Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether investigation should be entrusted to the CBI where allegations were against police personnel.
Analysis: Section 154(1) casts a mandatory duty on the officer in charge of a police station to register a case when information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before him. The genuineness or credibility of the information is not to be examined at the stage of registration. If the officer refuses to register, the aggrieved person may approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3). The pendency of a contempt petition or the availability of some other remedy does not justify refusal to register the case. Where the complaint is against police personnel, an independent agency is appropriate for investigation in the interest of justice.
Conclusion: The refusal to register the complaint was held to be illegal, and the CBI was directed to register the case and investigate the complaint.
Ratio Decidendi: Information disclosing a cognizable offence must be registered as a case without assessing its credibility at the threshold, and allegations against the police may justify independent investigation by the CBI.