High Court quashes 1,100 FIRs filed for violation of Covid norms
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed more than 1,100 FIRs registered under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Epidemic Diseases Act and the Disaster Management Act for violating prohibitory orders issued by the authorities during the Covid pandemic across Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh.
A Division Bench of the high court observed that the cases were initiated by the police, rather than authorised public servants, making these legally untenable. The court was of the opinion that legal proceedings could not be pursued in such instances, as they violated statutory provisions.
“The Covid pandemic posed an enormous challenge to the mankind. It was an extraordinary and unprecedented situation. The law enforcement and other agencies, including those maintaining essential services, were overstretched and the general public at large was also facing great hardships as it was a compelling situation. It is apparent that there were instances where people had to venture out of their houses in search of food, medicines or due to other emergent situations and in process, they violated the prohibitory orders issued by the authorities,” the Bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Lapita Banerji said.
Cases clogging judicial system
A large number of such cases are clogging the judicial system, which is already under strain due to a huge backlog. It would be expedient and in the interest of the justice if these cases, registered under Section 188 of the IPC by the police and not by the authorised officer, are quashed by this court. — HC Bench
The court added it being a constitutional court was required to impart complete justice. Section 482 of the CrPC empowered it to exercise its jurisdiction to prevent the “abuse of the process of law to secure the ends of justice”. Similar powers could be exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution, wherein the high court’s jurisdiction as a constitutional court was wider.
Referring to the legal provisions, the Bench observed Section 188 of the IPC dealt with disobedience to orders duly promulgated by public servants. Section 195(1)(a) of the CrPC, at the same time, made it clear that the courts would not take cognisance of a complaint under Section 188 unless it was initiated in writing by a public servant authorised to do so. “In the event, the complaint is not made by a public servant, who is authorised to do so, it would not be maintainable,” the court added.
The Bench observed that counsel for the states of Punjab and Haryana, along with UT Chandigarh, submitted that a large number of FIRs, under Section 188, were registered at the instance of the police and not by a public servant authorised to do so in terms of Section 195.
“The investigations in some of these cases are still underway while other matters have been sent for trial. A large number of these cases are clogging the judicial system, which is already under strain due to a huge backlog. It would be expedient and in the interest of justice if the cases, which have been registered under Section 188 IPC by the police and not by the authorised officer, are quashed by this court,” the Bench concluded.
