Ignorance Of Law Is Not An Excuse: Bombay HC Imposes ₹25k Cost On State For Registering FIR Against 9-Year-Old Boy
The Bombay High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 25000 on the State after an FIR was registered against a 9-year-old boy for the alleged offence punishable under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice S. M. Modak was shocked that the police registered the FIR against a 9-year-old boy.
The Court observed that "Misconception or ignorance of law is not an excuse, much less, for a police officer and in the peculiar facts, more so, having regard to the fact that the child was only 9 years of age."
"This action of the police i.e. of registration of FIR, has resulted in traumatizing a 9 year old boy. Despite Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code, the police have proceeded to register the FIR as against the petitioner's son, a minor aged 9 years, at the behest of the respondent No.3 (original complainant). The action reflects complete non-application of mind by the concerned officer whilst registering the offence.", the bench observed while quashing the FIR against the minor boy.
In this case, as per the original complainant the minor boy aged 9 years, lost his balance while cycling and dashed against her mother, as a result of which, she sustained an injury.
Pursuant thereto, the original complainant approached the Vanrai Police Station, Mumbai, and lodged a complaint. The said FIR was lodged after about one week after the incident.
Aggrieved, the mother of the minor boy approached High Court.
Advocate Shravan Giri appeared for the Petitioner whereas Assistant Public Prosecutor J. P. Yagnik appeared for the State. Advocate Viresh Purwant appeared for the original complainant.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the age of the petitioner's son i.e. 9 years, no FIR could have been registered by the police, keeping in mind the mandate of Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code.
The A.P.P submitted that the prosecution has no objection to the quashing of the FIR.
The counsel for the original complainant orally submitted that the original complainant also has no objection to the quashing of the FIR/proceeding.
"The facts clearly reveal that it was nothing but an accident, which was clearly unintentional. The boy was only aged 9 years. We are shocked and surprised that the police registered the FIR against a minor boy, at the behest of the respondent No.3, without having regard to the age of the boy involved.", the Court observed.
Thus the Court quashed the FIR registered against the minor boy.
The Court directed the State Government to pay the cost of Rs. 25,000/- to the petitioner, within eight weeks. The Court directed the said cost to be recovered from the concerned officers, responsible for the said lapse.
Cause Title- AK v. The State of Maharashtra