TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... VIKRAM NATH, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 31.01.2024 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in R/Special Criminal Application (Direction) No. 1321 of 2024, whereby the High Court dismissed the appellant's plea seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering any First Information Report [FIR] against him for acts performed in his official capacity. 3. The facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellant is a retired Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer who served in various administrative capacities, including as the Collector of Kachchh District, Gujarat, between 2003 and 2006. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... his submissions, the appellant placed reliance on the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., [(2014) 2 SCC 1] to argue that the registration of an FIR should be preceded by a preliminary inquiry in cases involving allegations of abuse of official position. 5. The State of Gujarat, opposing the petition, argued before the High Court that the relief sought by the appellant was legally untenable. It was contended that under the settled position of law, once information regarding the commission of a cognizable offence is received, the police authorities are dutybound to register an FIR under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC] The State further argued that granting the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rior to the registration of an FIR. In view of these findings, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the appellant had failed to make out a case for the interference prayed for. 7. The appellant, aggrieved by the dismissal of his writ petition, has approached this Court by way of the present appeal. The primary contention raised by the appellant before this Court is that multiple FIRs have been registered against him in a sequential manner, particularly after he secured bail in previous cases, and that the registration of such successive FIRs without a preliminary inquiry amounts to an abuse of process. It has been argued that such arbitrary registration of FIRs violates the principles of fairness and due process enshr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tory in cases where the allegations do not prima facie disclose a cognizable offense. It was further argued that the State's conduct in registering successive FIRs, despite the appellant's superannuation in 2015, reflects an ulterior motive to harass him, rather than a bona fide attempt to investigate any alleged wrongdoing. It was thus prayed that the respondent authorities be directed to mandatorily conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering any further FIR against the appellant and that he be granted an opportunity to provide his explanation before any fresh investigation is initiated. 10. Per contra, the learned Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the respondent-State, vehemently opposed the appeal, arguing that the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....used the records. The legal position regarding the registration of FIRs in cases of cognizable offences is well settled. This Court, in Lalita Kumari (supra), has categorically held that the registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC if the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. The relevant paragraphs from the judgment of this Court in Lalita Kumari (supra) are reproduced below: "114. It is true that a delicate balance has to be maintained between the interest of the society and protecting the liberty of an individual. As already discussed above, there are already sufficient safeguards provided in the Code which duly protect the liberty of an individual in case of registration of false FIR. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R 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....