A question of competency

When the Margao police nabbed a wanted criminal from Ratnagiri, Faik Mustaka Ahmed Karambelkar on January 9 with a US make 9 mm pistol, realisation soon dawned that the accused was taking shelter in a rented apartment on the city outskirts at Nagmodem-Navelim since December 2012. 

Taken off guard and exposing the beat police system hollow, the men-in-uniform were quick to tell the media that the landlady Felina Colaco will be hauled up for leasing her apartment to the accused without complying with the tenant verification process in violation of the District Magistrate’s order issued under section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In fact, the police had the media believing that the landlady would face prosecution under section 188 of the Indian Penal code for violating the magistrate’s order.

Little less than a month now and the police say they are not competent under the CrPC to initiate action against the landlady, notwithstanding the District Magistrate’s order giving clear directives to the police station in-charge to book the violators.

The police maintain that only the magistrate or his subordinates are empowered to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) against the violators under Section 144 of the CrPC. Substantiating this claim, the police have relied on a recent order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Margao discharging an accused on grounds that the FIR was not lodged by the mamlatdar as mandated under section 144 of the CrPC.

In fact, district police chief Shekhar Prabhudessai has despatched a detailed note to District Magistrate Venancio Furtado with a request to look into the matter in the light of the JMFC’s order of discharge of an accused and initiate appropriate proceedings against the landlady from Nagmodem for violating the order under section 144 of the CrPC.

But, the row is unlikely to end in the near future. Furtado said that he will forward the note from the district police chief to the law department for legal opinion on the controversy. 

“My office had issued clear directives to the police station in-charges to lodge FIRs against erring landlords. But, the district police chief has returned back saying the authority competent to lodge the FIR is the magistrate or his subordinates issuing the order under the CrPC. I have decided to seek legal opinion on the vexed issue,” Furtado said.

Incidentally, Herald inquiries have revealed that though there have been orders galore from the District Magistrate issued from time to time over the years, the authorities have been caught napping in prosecuting the erring landlords, when the District Magistrate and the police chief are divided on the contentious issue of who will crack a whip against the violators. In the instant case, it is believed, the erring landlady may escape the long arm of the law with the district magistrate and the police chief undecided on who should crack a whip against the violators.

“Upon perusal of the charge sheet, I find that in terms of section 195(1)(a)(1) CrPC read with section 188 IPC, there is no complaint filed by the Mamlatdar of Salcete whose order is alleged to have been violated.”

The JMFC further adds: “The complaint of the public officer being sine qua non for taking cognisance of an offence U/S 188 IPC, I find that there is no material to proceed against the accused.” Hence, proceedings are ordered to be stopped and the accused discharged. 

The JMFC had passed the order in a case where in the Margao police had moved with alacrity on November 22, 2012 at Telaulim to book the organisers of a musical show for disobeying the orders promulgated by Salcete Mamlatdar by carrying on the show by using the speakers and microphones beyond the permitted time.

Commenting on the JMFC’s order, a senior police officer remarked that the order is clear that FIR lodged by the police will not stand in a court of law unless the same is lodged by the authority issuing the order.