The Supreme Court of India has stayed key parts of an Allahabad High Court order that required the Uttar Pradesh police to obtain legal opinions before registering First Information Reports (FIRs) in cases that appear to be civil or commercial disputes.
Background of the Case:
On August 14, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol suspended three specific paragraphs of the impugned order issued by the Allahabad High Court on April 18. This High Court order had directed the Uttar Pradesh police to seek legal advice from Government counsel before registering FIRs for cases involving Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 408 (criminal breach of trust by clerk or servant), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 467 (forgery of valuable security), and 471 (using as genuine a forged document) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), if they appeared to be related to civil or commercial disputes.
Specific Directives of the High Court:
- Legal Opinion Requirement: The Allahabad High Court instructed that before registering an FIR for cases involving the mentioned IPC sections, where a civil or commercial dispute is apparent, the police must obtain an opinion from the District Government Counsel or Deputy District Government Counsel. This opinion should be included in the concluding part of the FIR.
- Role of the Director General of Police (DGP): The DGP, Uttar Pradesh, was directed to ensure that all Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs) instructed their respective Station House Officers (SHOs) to follow this procedure.
- Prosecution Directions: The Director of Prosecution, Uttar Pradesh, was also instructed to issue necessary directions to all concerned Government counsels.
- Contempt Proceedings: Police officers failing to seek a legal opinion before registering FIRs in applicable cases after May 1, 2024, could face contempt proceedings.
- Exceptions: The directions would not apply to FIRs registered under the direction of a competent court under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which pertains to the police investigating cognizable offenses.
Supreme Court’s Interim Order:
The Supreme Court’s interim order came in response to a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Uttar Pradesh Government challenging the High Court’s directives. The Supreme Court bench directed that the operation and implementation of paragraphs 15 to 17 of the High Court’s order be stayed until further notice.
Controversial Paragraphs:
“15. In the light of aforesaid recent judgments of Supreme Court, this Court deem it appropriate to issue direction to the Director General of Police, U.P. to the following effect:-
(i) Where an F.I.R. is sought to be registered under Sections 406, 408, 420 / 467, 471 I.P.C. etc., wherein, on the face of it, it appears that there is a commercial dispute or a civil dispute or a dispute arising out of different types of agreements or partnership deeds, etc. before registration of the F.I.R., an opinion will be taken in all such cases from the concerned District Government Counsel / Deputy District Government Counsel in their respective Districts and only after obtaining a report, the F.I.R. will be registered. Such opinion will be reproduced in concluding part of F.I.R.
(ii) The D.G.P., U.P. will issue necessary instructions to all the S.S.P. in the State of Uttar Pradesh who will further instruct all Station House Officers of their respective police stations to ensure that prior to registration of the F.I.R. where a civil /commercial dispute is apparent, the opinion of the District / Deputy Government Counsel should be taken at the pre-cognizance stage.
(iii) Director Prosecution U.P. will also insure necessary directions to all Government counsels concerned.
(iv) It is made clear that in all cases where first information reports, which are to be registered after 01.05.2024, if no such legal opinion is taken by the concerned police official before registration of the F.I.R., as per (i) and (ii) above they may be liable to contempt proceedings.
(v) This direction will not apply where F.I.R’s. are registered on direction of competent Court under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as these directions relates to pre-cognizance stage.
16. This court is also experiencing that the trial courts while exercising power under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. are virtually acting as post office by just forwarding the complaint to concerned police officer with direction to register the F.I.R.s. This is not the mandate of Lalita Kumari’s case as per paragraph 120.1.
17. Therefore, directions are also issued to all the magistrates in State of U.P. who are exercising power under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to pass an order directing registration of F.I.R./s only after a satisfactory note “after careful perusal of contents of entire complaint and as per affidavit of informant/ complainant no prior civil dispute is pending inter se parties before any court of law, therefore, the Court is convinced that commission of cognizable offence is made out.“
Case Reference:
