Facts
On May 22, 2021, during COVID-19 restrictions, the petitioner was intercepted by police personnel from Police Station Chiman Ganj Mandi, Ujjain, while heading to a temple for evening prayers.
Source reference: para. 2Despite explaining his identity and religious purpose, the police registered an FIR (Crime No. 649 of 2021) for the offense punishable under Section 188 of the IPC for violating a prohibitory order.
Source reference: para. 2The petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashment of the FIR and consequential proceedings under Section 528 of the BNSS (Section 482 of the CrPC).
Source reference: para. 1Issues
1. Whether an FIR under Section 188 of the IPC can be maintained in the absence of a written complaint by the concerned public servant as required under Section 195 of the CrPC.
Source reference: para. 9-10Law Applied
Section 188 of the IPC, which penalizes disobedience to orders promulgated by public servants if such act causes obstruction, annoyance, or danger.
Source reference: para. 6Section 195 of the CrPC (corresponding to Section 215 of the BNSS), which creates a mandatory bar against taking cognizance of offenses punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of the IPC except on a "complaint in writing" of the concerned public servant or their administrative superior.
Source reference: para. 8-9Reasoning
The court Reasoned that the statutory bar under Section 195 expressly prohibits any court from taking cognizance of such offenses based on a mere police report or FIR.
Source reference: para. 9Since the proceedings against the petitioner were initiated via an FIR registered by the police rather than a written complaint by the public servant whose order was allegedly disobeyed, the legal foundation for the prosecution was fundamentally flawed.
Source reference: para. 10The Court observed that while Section 188 of the IPC defines the offense of disobeying a public servant's order [para. 6-7], Section 195 of the CrPC establishes a strict procedural requirement for prosecution.
Source reference: para. 8Holding
The Court answered the issue in the negative, holding that the impugned FIR could not be legally sustained due to the procedural bar under Section 195 of the CrPC.
The Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 649 of 2021 and all consequential proceedings.
Source reference: para. 10-11The Court granted the State liberty to file a fresh complaint following the procedure prescribed under Section 195 of the CrPC, subject to the limitation periods defined under Section 468 of the CrPC (Section 514 of the BNSS).
Source reference: para. 10Original Court PDF
Pranav BhartivsThe State Of Madhya Pradesh
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in