Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2014 (1) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 1817 - SC - Indian LawsOffence made out under Sections 42 and 45 (12) of the Prisons Act - Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the petition to quash the FIR? - Held that:- The appellant was not a prisoner at the date of the commission of the offence. He could thus, not have committed a ‘prison offence’ as defined under Section 45 of the Act. Hence, no offence is made out under Section 45 of the Act. Insofar as Section 42 of the Act is concerned, it provides that only that communication, which is contrary to the rules made under Section 59 of the Act is prohibited. The FIR for the offence was dated 24.09.2009. This notification will obviously not apply to the case in hand as the alleged offence was committed in 2009, and retrospective effect will not apply in the case of criminal laws. Hence, there is no offence made out against the appellant and we cannot accept the reasoning of the High Court in the impugned judgment. We hereby hold that this section cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. The case of the appellant clearly falls under category (1) of the grounds of quashing of FIR mentioned in the case of Bhajan Lal (1990 (11) TMI 386 - SUPREME COURT). On the date of the offence, mobile phone was not listed as one of the prohibited articles under the Punjab Prison Manual. Thus, no offence is made out under Section 42 of the Act, as there was no communication which was done or was attempted to being done contrary to the rules. Further, the appellant was not a prisoner on the date of the offence. Hence, he could not have committed a prison offence as defined under Section 45 of the Act. In view of the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside. The FIR dated 24.09.2009 and the proceedings against the appellant are quashed.
|