Tribune News Service
Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, July 8
In a significant judgment liable to change the way persons booked during the pandemic under the provisions of the Epidemic Diseases Act are proceeded against, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) has made it clear that the registration of an FIR in such matters is an abuse of the process of law.
The ruling by Justice Gurbir Singh came on a petition filed by Punjabi singer Gurnam Singh Bhullar through counsel PS Ahluwalia for quashing an FIR registered at the Rajpura Sadar police station in Patiala district under Section 188 of IPC and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act and Section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act.
The Bench was told that the FIR was registered after a police official allegedly received secret information that Bhullar, along with 40 companions, had gathered for the shooting of a film without government permission and face masks.
Taking up the matter, Justice Gurbir Singh asserted there was a specific bar on taking cognisance of an offence punishable under Section 188 on “disobedience to an order duly promulgated by a public servant” unless a complaint in writing was made to the court concerned by a public servant.
As such, an FIR could not be registered for an offence under Section 188 and final investigation report under Section 173 of the CrPC could not be filed before the court concerned on the basis of evidence collected in the FIR.
Justice Gurbir Singh said any offence under the Epidemic Diseases Act was deemed to be an offence under Section 188. The Act did not prescribe a specific punishment. Since punishment under Section 188 was prescribed, the procedure under it was to be followed for prosecuting a person under the Act.
Referring to the facts of the case in hand, Justice Gurbir Singh added that the investigating officer also invoked the provisions of the Disaster Management Act. The maximum punishment for Section 51 was two years. The offence, as such, was non cognisable and a complaint was required to be filed in the court.
Allowing the petition, Justice Gurbir Singh asserted that the police registered the FIR against the petitioner and others. The investigation was completed and final report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC was filed before the magistrate concerned.
But the mandatory provisions of Section 195 of the CrPC, dealing with “prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants”, were not followed.
“Only complaint could be filed by the officer, whose orders were violated and not by the police on the basis of investigation. The registration of an FIR in the instant case is abuse of the process of law,” Justice Gurbir Singh said while quashing the FIR registered against petitioner along with consequential proceedings.
Maximum punishment 2 years
The maximum punishment for Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act is two years. So, the offence is non cognisable. The court can take cognisance only on the complaint filed by the authority concerned for the violation of any provision of the said Act. — Justice Gurbir Singh
