J&K Court Slams Police Delay in FIR, Says Cognizable Offence Must Be Promptly Registered

A local court in Jammu and Kashmir’s Reasi district has criticised the police for failing to promptly register a complaint in a case involving a man whose body was found hanging from a tree in June.

In its recent judgment, the court said that police have a duty to promptly register an FIR and initiate an investigation when information is provided regarding the commission of a cognizable offence.

The observations were made by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Reasi, Geeta Kumari, in a 12-page judgment delivered last week.

Court Questions Police Delay in FIR Registration

The court came down heavily on the police over the delay in registering the complaint. It observed that when an informant approaches the police and provides information about the commission of a cognizable offence, police authorities cannot simply decide to conduct a preliminary inquiry to determine whether the information is credible.

According to the court, police are not vested with discretion to conduct such a preliminary assessment of the credibility of the information before registering an FIR in such circumstances.

The court emphasised that the police have a responsibility to act promptly once information regarding a cognizable offence is brought to their attention.

‘Police Cannot Examine Allegations Like a Court’

The court's observations underline the distinction between the responsibilities of police authorities and those of a court conducting a trial.

The judgment stated that police cannot treat the initial information as something that must first be tested through a detailed examination of its credibility before taking the required legal steps.

The court said that adopting such a practice would be contrary to established principles of criminal law.

The remarks came in connection with the case involving the discovery of a man's body hanging from a tree in Reasi district in June.

Court Refers to Limited Scope of Inquest

The court also referred to the inquest proceedings initiated by the police in the matter.

According to the judge, such proceedings have a “very limited scope” and cannot replace the investigation required in a case where information indicates the possibility of a cognizable offence.

The observation came while examining the police response to the circumstances surrounding the man's death and the delay in registering the complaint.

FIR and Investigation Duty

The judgment reiterated the importance of prompt police action when information about a cognizable offence is received.

The court's position was that police authorities should not first conduct an inquiry aimed at assessing whether the informant's allegations are credible before deciding whether to register an FIR.

Instead, the police have a duty to respond to the information and initiate the appropriate investigation process.

The Reasi court's judgment has therefore highlighted concerns over the manner in which the police handled the complaint in this case. Its observations focus particularly on the delay in FIR registration and the limits of preliminary inquiries and inquest proceedings.

The case also underscores the court's view that police investigation and judicial trial have different roles. According to the judgment, police authorities should not approach allegations as though they were conducting a court trial to determine their credibility at the initial stage.