Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
New Delhi, Oct 28 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the offense of threatening a witness to give false evidence under section 195A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is cognizable and the police can register an FIR without a court complaint.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe said, “Once the offense under Section 195A of the IPC is classified as a cognizable offence, the power of the police to take action under Sections 154 CrPC and 156 CrPC cannot be doubted.”
A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing special leave petitions (SLPs) filed by the State of Kerala and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the orders of the High Court which had quashed the proceedings on the grounds that such cases require a written complaint from the court concerned under Section 195 (1) (b) (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
In its judgment, the top court said that Section 195A of the IPC, introduced in 2006, was “conceptualized as a separate and distinct offense” under Sections 193 to 196 of the IPC.
“A witness may be threatened long before he comes to the court, although giving false evidence under such threat is in connection 18 with the proceedings before that court. Perhaps that is why this offense was made cognizable so that the threatened witness or other person can take immediate steps.”
Clarifying the procedure, the Supreme Court said that Section 195A of the CrPC, inserted in 2009, only provides an “additional measure” that allows a witness or any other person to file a complaint before a magistrate.
“The use of the word ‘may’ in Section 195A of the CrPC shows that it is not mandatory for a threatened witness or other person to approach only the concerned Magistrate to make a complaint of an offense under Section 195A of the IPC,” the top court ruled.
The top court set aside the April 4, 2023 order of the Kerala High Court and directed the accused to surrender before the trial court within two weeks.
However, the bench clarified that its decision “will not prevent him from seeking fresh bail on other grounds, if necessary”.
The Supreme Court also restored the Dharwad magistrate’s 2020 order, taking cognizance of the CBI complaint related to the murder of Yogesh Gowdar, and reinstated the earlier proceedings, which had been quashed by the Karnataka High Court.
It concluded that the interpretation given by the Kerala and Karnataka High Courts was “incorrect and untenable”.
–IANS
PDS/VD