HC asks Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh to frame SOP to curb false FIRs in sensitive cases

Expressing concern over citizens lodging false FIRs and abusing the process of law, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the Directors-General of Police (DGPs) of Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh to consider framing a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for investigating sensitive cases involving allegations of moral turpitude.

The directions by Justice Alok Jain came in a case where “serious allegations” were made by youngest sister of petitioner-accused “not only against her but against various other persons that she had been sold, drugged and being raped continuously for 22 days.”

Justice Jain asserted: “The present petition brings out a shocking revelation as to the transformation in society where citizens of this country are filing false FIRs thereby abusing the process of law and putting the life and liberty of the others at peril”.

Directing that such cases be probed by a Class-I gazetted officer with preliminary investigation before initiating action, Justice Jain asserted: “Every citizen must be made aware that while they are entitled to enforce their fundamental rights as envisaged in the Constitution, at the same time they are equally bound to speak the truth and cannot abuse the process of law by lodging false and malicious complaints.”

Referring to the facts of the case, Justice Jain added the state acted on the information and registered the present FIR after which the petitioner was arrested. But the complainant not only resiled from her statement, but also entered into a compromise after eight months of the petitioner being taken in custody. Besides this, the complainant solemnised marriage with one of the accused.

Justice Jain observed that the accused seeking the grant of regular bail in the FIR registered on November 7, 2024, at Mehtapur police station in Jalandhar district under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Her counsel argued that the entire story narrated in the FIR was false and fabricated and that the petitioner had been wrongly entangled. He further pointed out that the complainant had filed an affidavit stating she no longer wished to pursue the FIR, and had since married one of the accused.