If the police do not register a FIR, can the Supreme Court interfere?
The appellant had sent a representation to the Supreme Court against the police for not registering his First Information Report (FIR). Later he filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking to know what action the Supreme Court had taken on his representation. The Public Information Officer (PIO) informed him about the advice the Supreme Court had sent earlier whereby it was suggested to take recourse to the appropriate legal remedy. The PIO stated that he had no other information to offer.
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant submitted that the local civic authorities were completely neglecting the neighbourhood in which he lived and that his attempts to draw the attention of various authorities about the awful conditions of the roads and other amenities had yielded no results. Consequently he had wanted to file a FIR in the local police station against the Municipal authorities. The appellant also submitted that the police did not register his complaint and so he had sent a representation to the Supreme Court in the belief that it would intervene in the matter. The respondents pointed out that the Supreme Court had no role in such a matter and, as advised by the Supreme Court Registry in the past in response to his representation, the appellant have to find out the appropriate legal remedy for his problems.
View of CIC
The Central Information Commission (CIC) observed that the Supreme Court had taken no other action on the appellant’s representation except for advising him that he should seek the appropriate legal remedy and that is what the PIO had informed him. The Commission also held that if the appellant has any serious grievance against the local authorities, he would have to find out either some administrative remedy by taking up the matter before higher authorities of the State government or approach an appropriate court of law for seeking any legal remedy that might be available. The Commission rejected the appeal stating that the Supreme Court cannot substitute for a legal consultant and the PIO cannot be expected to give any advice on this.
Citation: Mr. S N Saran Kothiwal v. Supreme Court of India, in File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/001544
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/615
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission