Illegal For Police To File Chargesheet After Court Orders No Coercive Steps: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has clarified that it is illegal for the police file a charge-sheet after a Court grants an Order directing no coercive steps to be taken. The Supreme Court had issued an interim order that "no further action shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with First Information Report" (emphasis added). However, the Respondents contended that they understood the order as directing that "no coercive action" be taken against the Petitioner. 

While observing so, it closed contempt proceedings against certain Jharkhand police officials who had filed a charge-sheet against an accused in whose favour there was an Order by the Supreme Court directing not to take coercive action.

A two-Judge Bench comprising Justice A.S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih called the actions of the police "completely illegal", but closed the contempt proceedings initiated against a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), an Investigating Officer and a Station House Officer of the Jharkhand Police after they tendered apologies. 

Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Vishnu Sharma appeared for the State of Jharkhand.

"The apology tendered by three officers is accepted and no further action is called for against them. Hence, notice of contempt is discharged." the Court said.

It was noted that the police officers had relied on a April 15, 2011 letter by the Additional Director General of Police (AGP), Jharkhand, which states that even if a Court passes an order that no coercive action shall be taken as against the particular accused, there is no prohibition on filing charge-sheet against the accused.

The Court said if a chargesheet is filed relying upon it, against an accused in whose favour there is an order directing not to take coercive action, "the concerned officer will expose himself to contempt jurisdiction."

"We direct the learned counsel appearing for the State to invite attention of the Additional Director General of Police to observations of this court. We expect him to immediately modify the letter dated 15th April, 2011." the Court urged.

On August 18, 2023, while hearing a Special Leave Petition against a Jharkand High Court's Order refusing to quash the case against the Petitioner, the Supreme Court had issued notice to the state and ordered that "no further action shall be taken against the Petitioner in connection with First Information Report."

In a subsequent hearing on October 1, 2024, the Court noted the affidavit filed by the state government, and affirmed by a DSP-level officer "brings on record a very brazen act on the part of the Police Department of the State of Jharkhand." The Court noted that soon after its August interim Order, a chargesheet was filed against the accused, which even referred to the Court's Order.

"Filing of the charge-sheet and justifying the filing of the charge-sheet is prima facie, a wilful breach of the interim order dated 18th August, 2023 passed by this Court." the Court said, issuing notice of contempt to three police officials. The Court specifically directed the three officers to remain present before the Court on the next date of hearing, either personally or through video conferencing.

On November, 4, the Court recorded that the contemnors had tendered their apologies to the Court, but stated, "The prayer for acceptance of apology cannot be considered unless the contemnors explain their conduct by filing affidavits." 

Cause Title: Satish Kumar Ravi v. State of Jharkhand [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) 9859/2023]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate M. Shoeb Alam and Advocates Ujjwal Singh, Mojahid Karim Khan,  Shadab Eqbal,  Atefa Perwez, Abhishek Naik and Gulafsha Qureshi

Respondent: Advocate Vishnu Sharma, Madhusmita Bora, Pawan Kishore Singh, Dipankar Singh,   Anupama Sharma and Pavithra V.

Click here to read/download the Order