- (1.) HEARD.
(2.) THE Additional Civil Judge(Senior Division) and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan, vide its order dated 12.12.2011 passed in Case No.162/2011, referred the present matter under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to initiate contempt proceedings against contemnor Shri Aas Mohammed, the then S.H.O, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur. It has been observed in the order that complainant Kuldeep Sharma had filed a criminal complaint in the Court, which was forwarded on 13.08.2010 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of First Information Report. THE said complaint had been received at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur on 17.08.2010, however it was not registered immediately and the same was registered only on 07.09.2010, whereas total 35 FIRs' were registered during the period from 17.08.2010 to 07.09.2010 and 5 cases were registered during the said period on the basis of direction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It was further observed that from the documents annexed with the application, it is clear that the then S.H.O. Shri Aas Mohammed deliberately/malafidely disobeyed the order of the Court by not registering the FIR immediately, which amounts to criminal contempt. A notice to show cause was issued by this Court on 23.01.2012 and in response thereto, respondent filed a reply to contempt petition on 30.04.2012, wherein before submitting reply to contempt petition, the respondent submitted his unqualified and unconditional apology. On merits, it was stated in the reply that the Court below has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh And Others, (2008) 7 SCC 164, whereas it was only an interim order and subsequently the Larger Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide its order dated 27.02.2012, referred the matter to a Constitution Bench of at least five Judges, therefore, the matter is still sub-judiced before the Hon'ble Apex Court. It was further mentioned in the reply that FIR was registered on 07.09.2010; the police investigated the matter thoroughly and filed a Final Report on 13.10.2010, which was submitted in the Court on 20.10.2010 and after a delay of three months thereafter contempt petition was filed before the subordinate Court by the complainant on 11.01.2011. It has also been mentioned that Final Report submitted in the case, was accepted by the trial Court on 27.06.2011 and complainant has filed a revision petition against the acceptance of the F.R. Shri S.K. Gupta, Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent submitted that looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, no contempt is made out against the respondent. He, therefore, submitted that respondent may be discharged. In the alternative, he submitted that respondent has already tendered his unqualified and unconditional apology, which may be accepted, in case any contempt is made out against him. We have examined the order, under reference, and also the other documents, reply filed by respondent along with documents, order of Hon'ble Apex Court dated 14.07.2008 in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh And Others(supra) and also the subsequent order of Hon'ble Apex Court dated 27.02.2012, reported in 2012(2) Supreme 321. Undisputed facts of the case are that complaint filed by complainant Kuldeep Sharma was sent for registration of FIR by the subordinate Court on 13.08.2010, which was received at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur on 17.08.2010 and FIR was registered on 07.09.2010. From the contents of order of reference and from the documents annexed with the order of reference, it appear that total 35 FIRs' were registered during the period from 17.08.2010 to 07.09.2010, out of which 5 FIRs' were registered on the basis of direction issued under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
(3.) THE Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh And Others, (2008) 7 SCC 164, in para 6 has observed that if steps are not taken for registration of FIRs immediately and copies thereof are not made over to the complainants, they may move the Magistrates concerned by filing complaint petitions to give direction to the police to register case immediately upon receipt/production of copy of the orders and make over copy of the FIRs to the complainants. It has further been observed that in case FIRs' are not registered within the aforementioned time, and/or aforementioned steps are not taken by the police, the Magistrate concerned would be justified in initiating contempt proceeding against such delinquent officers and punish them for violation of its orders if no sufficient cause is shown and awarding stringent punishment like sentence of imprisonment against them. Para 6 of the order is reproduced as under:- "6. In view of the above, we feel that it is high time to give directions to the Governments of all the States and Union Territories besides their Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police as the case may be to the effect that if steps are not taken for registration of FIRs immediately and copies thereof are not made over to the complainants, they may move the Magistrates concerned by filing complaint petitions to give direction to the police to register case immediately upon receipt/production of copy of the orders and make over copy of the FIRs to the complainants, within twenty-four hours of receipt/production of copy of such orders. It may further give direction to take immediate steps for apprehending the accused persons and recovery of kidnapped/abducted persons and properties which were the subject-matter of theft or dacoity. In case FIRs are not registered within the aforementioned time, and/or aforementioned steps are not taken by the police, the Magistrate concerned would be justified in initiating contempt proceeding against such delinquent officers and punish them for violation of its orders if no sufficient cause is shown and awarding stringent punishment like sentence of imprisonment against them inasmuch as the disciplinary authority would be quite justified in initiating departmental proceeding and suspending them in contemplation of the same." The above order of the Hon'ble Apex Court was an interim order and the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court consisting of three Judges, referred the above matter to a Constitution Bench, vide its order dated 27.02.2012( reported in 2012(2) Supreme 321). Be that as it may, there is delay of 21 days in registering the FIR, which has not been explained satisfactorily by the respondent, however, in view of the fact that after investigation, a Final Report was submitted by the police which was accepted by the concerned Magistrate also and the said order is under challenge in a revision petition, as mentioned in reply to contempt petition, we are of the view that interest of justice will meet, in case unqualified and unconditional apology tendered by respondent is accepted and he may be warned to remain careful in future. ;