Court complaint not necessary for police to lodge FIR under Section 195A IPC for threat to witness: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified that a complaint from a court is not necessary for the police to register a first information report (FIR) to investigate a case involving the offence of threatening a witness to give false evidence under Section 195A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) [State of Kerala v. Suni @Sunil]..A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe clarified that since Section 195A of the IPC is a cognisable offence, the police can investigate such offences after an aggrieved person approaches it with a complaint.A special procedure is laid down in Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which has to be followed before a court can take cognisance of certain perjury-related offences.The top court has now held that this special process - which calls for a written complaint from a court - need not be mandatorily followed when it comes to offences under Section 195A IPC (threatening any person to give false evidence).The Bench observed that otherwise, it may defeat the goal of making sure that such crimes are promptly acted against."Requiring that person to go before the Court concerned, i.e., the Court in which the proceeding is pending in relation to which false evidence is to be given, and inform it about the threat received, thereby necessitating a complaint under Section 195(1)(b)(i) along with an inquiry under Section 340 CrPC, would only cripple and hamper the process...it is not compulsory for a threatened witness or other person to only approach the Magistrate concerned to complain of the offence under Section 195A IPC...the offence under Section 195A IPC is a cognizable offence and once that is so, the power of the police to take action...cannot be doubted," the ruling said..The Court noted that certain inconsistencies in the written law had led to confusion over whether a written complaint from a court was needed before the police could register an FIR in such cases.Such laxity in legislative draftsmanship can be a source of litigation, the Court observed, before clarifying how criminal law can be set into motion in cases involving Section 195A of the IPC (now replaced by Section 232 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023)..Notably, Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the CrPC (now replaced by BNSS) lays down that no trial court can take cognisance of any offence under Sections 193 to 196 of IPC when such offence concerns court proceedings, unless a written complaint is made by the court concerned or such court's officer or a higher court. Section 340 of the CrPC detailed a procedure for sending complaints with respect to offences mentioned in Section 195. Later, an amendment was introduced in 2009 to the CrPC when it came to dealing with offences under Section 195A IPC. The newly inserted provision, namely Section 195A of the CrPC, said that any witness or any other person may file a complaint in relation to an offence under Section 195A IPC.As a result, not just a court, but also a witness or any other person could file complaints in such cases involving threats to witnesses..However, a question remained as to whether such aggrieved witnesses/persons could approach the police directly in such matters.The High Courts of Kerala and Karnataka held that no criminal proceeding can be initiated with respect to an offence under Section 195A IPC without a court's written complaint as required under Section 195(1)(b)(i) read with Section 340 of the CrPC. The Kerala High Court made such an observation while granting bail to a man accused of threatening the approver in a murder case. The Karnataka High Court took this view while granting relief to two men accused of threatening witnesses in the murder case concerning the death of BJP worker Yogesh Goudar.Both orders were challenged before the Supreme Court, which passed a common order disagreeing with the High Courts' views. .The Court explained that even though Section 195A IPC appeared to have been grouped with some non-cognisable offences (Sections 193-196 of IPC) in Section 195 CrPC, it was still a cognisable offence. The police were, therefore, empowered to directly register FIRs in such matters upon an aggrieved person approaching it, the top court held. The Court held that Section 195A IPC was deliberately made cognizable so that a threatened witness could immediately seek police protection and action without waiting for court intervention..The top court added that the provision under Section 195A, CrPC - which allowed a person to file witness threat complaints before the concerned court - was only an additional remedy..Senior Advocate Raghenth Basant and Advocates Harshad V Hameed, Dileep Poolakkot, Ashly Harshad, Mahabir Singh, Kaushitaki Sharma and Anshul Saharan appeared for the appellants.Advocates Minakshi Vij, Alok Bhatt and Jagriti Singh appeared for the respondents..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.