Pendency of inquest proceedings not a bar to lodge FIR in cognizable offence: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh recently ruled that a first information report (FIR) can be lodged on receipt of information about the commission of a cognizable offence even while inquest proceedings initiated under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are pending. [Rahul Kumar & Ors V/s UT of J&K and Anr.].Justice MA Chowdhary explained that inquest proceedings under Section 174 of CrPC (police to enquire and report on suicide, etc.) is different from investigation carried out in a cognizable offence under Sections 156 and 157, CrPC.The proceedings under Section 174 of CrPC have a very limited scope. The object of these proceedings is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious circumstances or an unnatural death and if so what is the apparent cause of death, the Court observed..On the other hand, the Court noted that,"So far as the investigation is concerned, the same commences with the recording of an information pertaining to commission of a cognizable offence. Any step taken by the investigating officer pursuant to recording of such an information towards detection of the crime would be a part of investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure. So these are two distinct types of proceedings.".Hence, the judge concluded that the pendency of an inquest is not a bar to the initiation of investigation into a cognisable offence by lodging an FIR."It is held that, even without conclusion of inquest proceedings initiated under Section 174 CrPC, case can be registered for investigation by lodging of FIR, on receipt of information about commission of cognizable offence", the Court's order stated. .The High Court made the observation while dismissing a plea to quash an order passed by a Magistrate for the registration of an FIR in a case involving allegations of dowry demands and cruelty to a married woman, who had died due to electrocution while cooking in 2020, as per a police report. .The Magistrate had passed the order on an application moved by the father of the deceased woman under Section 156 (3), CrPC (any magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation)..Subsequently, an FIR was registered against the husband, his mother and his sisters. Pertinently, the order to register the FIR was passed while an inquest under Section 174 of CrPC, to ascertain the cause of death of the woman was ongoing. .The accused proceeded to challenge the Magistrate court order on the ground that such an FIR could not be lodged while the inquest was yet to be completed. The accused also denied the allegations made against them by the deceased woman's father. .The High Court ultimately found that the Magistrate order could not be held to be unsustainable in law merely because the inquest proceedings were pending when the order was passed."There was sufficient material before the learned Magistrate to conclude that cognizable offences had taken place which required investigation by the police … Therefore, there being no illegality, order impugned is sustainable," the High Court said. .Therefore, the High Court dismissed the plea challenging the Magistrate order..[Read Order]