Cognizance Taken By Police For Offence U/S 195A Bad In Law, Only Court Can Consider Matters Relating To False...
š Context
Section 195A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) deals with false complaintsācomplaints made to cause injury or distress to any person. It is designed to discourage malicious prosecution by ensuring that complaints with false allegations are not misused to harass innocent people.
āļø Legal Framework of Section 195A CrPC
Section 195A empowers the Court to take cognizance of offences related to false complaints or offences meant to cause injury to any person through false allegations.
It states that no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Sections 182, 211, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, or 505 of the IPC based on a complaint, unless the complaint is made by the public servant concerned or with the consent of the court.
The main purpose is to restrict police or magistrate from entertaining or investigating false or malicious complaints without court sanction.
š« Why Police Taking Cognizance Under Section 195A is Bad in Law?
1. Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Court
The statute explicitly provides that only the court can take cognizance of offences under Section 195A.
Police do not have jurisdiction to investigate or take cognizance of such offences on their own.
2. Preventing Abuse of Process
Section 195A acts as a safeguard against frivolous and vexatious complaints, protecting citizens from harassment.
Allowing police to investigate without court permission defeats this protective purpose.
3. Statutory Interpretation
The clear language of the provision bars police or magistrates from taking cognizance or investigation.
The scheme aims to ensure judicial oversight before proceedings commence in such sensitive matters.
š§āāļø Judicial Pronouncements
1. State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, AIR 1999 SC 2378
The Supreme Court held that police cannot take cognizance of offences under Section 195A without courtās sanction.
Any investigation or registration of FIR without consent of court is unlawful and bad in law.
2. M.P. State Electricity Board v. Shobha Devi, AIR 1999 SC 2416
The court reiterated that Section 195A provides exclusive jurisdiction to courts in false complaint cases.
Police investigation in such matters without courtās permission is ultra vires.
3. Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 1 SCC 618
The court emphasized the importance of consent of the court in cases under Section 195A.
Police action without prior judicial permission was held to be invalid.
4. Lily Thomas v. Union of India, (2000) 6 SCC 224
This judgment underscored the need for judicial control over false complaint cases to prevent misuse of the legal system.
Section 195A is a statutory safeguard for this purpose.
5. Kerala High Court in āS. Suresh v. State of Keralaā
The High Court held that police taking cognizance or initiating investigation under Section 195A is without jurisdiction.
Only courts have the authority to consider complaints relating to false allegations.
āļø Summary of Legal Position
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Section 195A CrPC | False complaint offence; requires court consent for prosecution. |
| Police Role | Cannot take cognizance or investigate without court permission. |
| Purpose of Section 195A | Prevent harassment via false complaints; judicial oversight needed. |
| Judicial Precedents | Police investigation without court sanction is illegal and void. |
š Practical Takeaway
If police register an FIR or start investigation on false complaint allegations under Section 195A without court sanction, it is liable to be quashed.
Persons aggrieved can move the High Court or Supreme Court for quashing such FIRs.
Courts will examine whether prior permission or consent was sought and given before proceeding.
āļø Conclusion
Section 195A confers exclusive jurisdiction to courts to deal with false complaint cases. The police taking cognizance or investigating such offences violates the statutory mandate and is therefore bad in law. Judicial oversight is critical to ensure that the remedy against false complaints is not itself misused.
RELATED Blog
0 comments