Cognizance under Section 188 IPC requires a written complaint under Section 195 CrPC.

The Circle Officer, Raghopur, received information that boats were being operated at Kangan Ghat, Sukumarpur, without valid registration and after sunset while carrying tourists. The alleged violations were attributed to seven persons, namely, Nagendra Rai and the other petitioners. The Circle Officer directed the Station House Officer of Rustampur Outpost to register an FIR

Following investigation, a chargesheet was submitted, and the learned ACJM-IV, Hajipur, took cognizance against the petitioners under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code on 31 May 2017 in Trial No. 2428 of 2017

The petitioners invoked the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to quash the cognizance order and the consequential criminal proceedings, contending that Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure required a written complaint by the concerned public servant, and that cognizance could not be taken on the basis of a police FIR

Whether cognizance of an offence under Section 188 of the IPC could be taken on the basis of an FIR and police investigation, despite the bar under Section 195(1)(a) of the CrPC?

Whether the cognizance order dated 31 May 2017 and the consequential criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed under the principles governing the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction?

Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure bars every court from taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of the IPC, or their abetment, attempt, or conspiracy, except upon a written complaint by the public servant concerned or another public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate

The Court relied on the principles stated in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, particularly category (6) of paragraph 102, under which proceedings may be quashed where an express legal bar exists to their institution or continuance

The Court also treated the statutory requirement of a written complaint as distinct from the registration of a police case and submission of a police chargesheet

The alleged offence was under Section 188 of the IPC, which falls expressly within the scope of Section 195(1)(a) of the CrPC

Although the Circle Officer supplied the information and directed the police to register the case, the prosecution proceeded through an FIR, police investigation, and chargesheet rather than through a written complaint satisfying Section 195(1)(a)

Consequently, the statutory bar operated against the trial court taking cognizance on that basis. Applying category (6) of the Bhajan Lal guidelines concerning proceedings instituted in the face of an express legal bar, the High Court found the cognizance order legally unsustainable

The cognizance order dated 31 May 2017 in Trial No. 2428 of 2017, arising from Raghopur P.S. Case No. 10 of 2017, together with all consequential proceedings against the petitioners, was quashed and set aside. The application was accordingly allowed, and the trial court records were directed to be returned