Calcutta High Court holds that once a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, the police cannot decline to register a First Information Report (FIR) solely because the complainant seeks to withdraw or does not desire registration. This judgment reaffirms binding precedent, clarifies the police’s statutory obligation, and is controlling in all criminal law matters involving FIR registration procedure in West Bengal.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | MAT/1189/2025 of SK ARBAJ Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0352872025 |
| Date of Registration | 29-07-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK, HON’BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Division Bench: Debangsu Basak, J. and Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J. |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority in West Bengal; persuasive elsewhere |
| Overrules / Affirms | Sets aside order of learned Single Judge in WPA 11796 of 2025 |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure |
| Questions of Law | Whether police can refuse to register an FIR for a cognizable offence on account of the complainant’s withdrawal. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that once a complaint discloses commission of a cognizable offence, there is no question of the police refusing to register it as an FIR solely on the basis that the complainant does not desire such registration. The statutory obligation of the police under Section 154 CrPC is triggered by the contents of the complaint, not the subsequent stand of the complainant. The police, if satisfied that a cognizable offence is disclosed, must register an FIR. A complainant’s subsequent withdrawal request does not relieve the police of this duty. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The appellant lodged a police complaint disclosing cognizable offences. The Officer-in-Charge opined that the complaint must be registered as an FIR. However, registration did not occur as the appellant was said to have withdrawn from seeking FIR registration, allegedly due to pressure. The Court observed the police must register an FIR regardless of a complainant’s withdrawal when cognizable offences are disclosed. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and police authorities in West Bengal |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and police authorities outside West Bengal |
| Overrules | Order dated 23 June 2025 of the learned Single Judge in WPA 11796 of 2025 |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that police cannot abstain from registering an FIR for a cognizable offence merely because the complainant withdraws or expresses disinclination.
- Reiterates the mandatory nature of Section 154 CrPC: registration depends on contents of complaint, not complainant’s later wishes.
- Lawyers can rely on this ruling to compel FIR registration where cognizable offences are disclosed, regardless of withdrawing complainants.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court observed that the Officer-in-Charge had determined, after preliminary enquiry, that the complaint disclosed cognizable offences, mandating FIR registration.
- The justification for not registering the FIR was based solely on the complainant’s alleged withdrawal, not on any legal insufficiency.
- The Division Bench held categorically that once commission of a cognizable offence is disclosed, police are duty bound under CrPC to register an FIR, regardless of complainant’s subsequent stand.
- The Bench set aside the Single Judge’s order that relegated the petitioner to approach the Magistrate and directed police to register the FIR within seven days.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Highlighted that the police report before the Single Judge noted a direction to register the complaint as FIR.
- Contended that any purported withdrawal of request for FIR registration was due to pressure.
- Asserted that the complaint disclosed cognizable offences and should have been registered as FIR.
State
Representation recorded; no detailed argument by State is given in the judgment.
Factual Background
The appellant lodged a complaint with the local police station, disclosing the commission of cognizable offences. Though the Officer-in-Charge was of the view that the complaint should be registered as an FIR, the police did not proceed with registration, citing the appellant’s subsequent withdrawal from such request. The appellant claimed this withdrawal was due to pressure. The Single Judge, in WPA 11796 of 2025, disposed of the writ petition by allowing the appellant to approach the Magistrate for relief.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment reaffirms the mandatory terms of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which obligates police to register any information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence as an FIR.
- The Court clarified that this statutory duty is not dependent on the complainant’s desire or subsequent withdrawal.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed
- 🚨 Breaking Precedent (with respect to the Single Judge’s order)