LexPRADEEP NIRANKARNATH SHARMA versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 32 : 2025 INSC 350 Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 1313 of 2025) 17 March 2025 [Vikram Nath* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Does the decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [2013] 14 SCR 713 create an absolute rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.154 – The appellant placed reliance on Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., to argue that the registration of an FIR should be preceded by a preliminary inquiry in cases involving allegations of abuse of official position – Correctness: Held: The scope of a preliminary inquiry, as clarified in the Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., is limited to situations where the information received does not prima facie disclose a cognizable offence but requires verification – However, in cases where the information clearly discloses a cognizable offence, the police have no discretion to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR – The decision in Lalita Kumari does not create an absolute rule that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted in every case before the registration of an FIR – Rather, it reaffirms the settled principle that the police authorities are obligated to register an FIR when the information received prima facie discloses a cognizable offence. [Para 12] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.154 – The High Court dismissed the appellant’s plea seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering any First Information Report against him for acts performed in his official capacity – Correctness: * Author [2025] 4 S.C.R. 33 Pradeep Nirankarnath Sharma v. State of Gujarat & Ors. Held: In the present case, the allegations against the appellant pertain to the abuse of official position and corrupt practices while holding public office – Such allegations fall squarely within the category of cognizable offences, and there exists no legal requirement for a preliminary inquiry before the registration of an FIR in such cases – The appellant’s contention that successive FIRs have been registered against him with an ulterior motive is a matter that can be examined during the course of investigation and trial – The appellant has adequate remedies under the law, including the right to seek quashing of frivolous FIRs u/s. 482 CrPC, the right to apply for bail, and the right to challenge any illegal actions of the investigating authorities before the appropriate forum. [Para 13] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – FIR – Statutory framework – Judicial overreach – Whether this Court can issue a blanket direction restraining the registration of FIRs against the appellant or mandating a preliminary inquiry in all future cases involving him: Held: This Court cannot issue a blanket direction restraining the registration of FIRs against the appellant or mandating a preliminary inquiry in all future cases involving him – Such a direction would not only be contrary to the statutory framework of the CrPC but would also amount to judicial overreach – As rightly observed by the High Court, courts cannot rewrite statutory provisions or introduce additional procedural safeguards that are not contemplated by law. [Para 14] Case Law Cited Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [2013] 14 SCR 713 : (2014) 2 SCC 1 – relied on. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Section 154 of CrPC; Preliminary inquiry before registering FIR; Cognizable offences; Statutory obligation; Judicial overreach; Abuse of official position; Corruption; Financial irregularities; Successive FIRs; Blanket protection against investigation. 34 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 1313 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 31.01.2024 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in SCA No. 1321 of 2024 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Kapil Sibal, Devadatt Kamat, Sr. Advs., Divyesh Pratap Singh, Ms. Rupali Francesca Samuel, Rajesh Inamdar, Ajay Desai, Amit Sangwan. Advs. for the Respondents: Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Mitesh Amin, A.A.G., Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv., Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Kanu Agarwal, Ms. Neha Singh. Judgment / Or
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.