Madhya Pradesh High Court

FIR under Section 188 IPC is Impermissible without a Written Complaint from the Concerned Public Servant per Section 195 CrPC.

Pranav Bharti vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High CourtJUDGMENT: May 07, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

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. 2

Despite 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. 2

The 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. 1
02

Issues

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. 9-10
03

Law 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. 6

Section 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. 8-9
04

Reasoning

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. 9

Since 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. 10

The 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. 8
05

Holding

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. 10-11

The 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. 10
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Original Court PDF

Pranav BhartivsThe State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · May 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment