Money seizure row: Court can treat IO’s report as complaint

It held that the report submitted by the Investigation Officer (IO) can be treated as a complaint and the Judicial Magistrate can progress with the case.

An election flying squad had recovered Rs 4 lakh from one Ramesh of Vellore in 2019. Despite his reported claims that he had borrowed money from one Murugan for the construction of his house, an FIR was registered based on a complaint from the Superintendent, Static Surveillance Team, Sholingur constituency. Following this, as per Cr. P.C requirements a report was submitted before the Walajapet Judicial Magistrate as regards the FIR registered. Thereafter, as the investigation concluded that the seized money was sought to be used to bribe voters, a final report was filed before the Judicial Magistrate against the said Ramesh for an offence under IPC section 171-E.

Assailing this, the petitioner claimed that investigation for the non-cognizable offence was initiated and the final report submitted without taking Magistrate’s permission and the report against him was inadmissible in law. However, Justice N Anand Venkatesh on obtaining the view of the bar in this regard ruled, “In the present case, the FIR was not registered based on the commission of either cognizable or non-cognizable offence but based on the seizure of the money by the election squad which was unaccounted, and a complaint was given in that regard.” “On the completion of the investigation, if a non-cognizable offence is disclosed, obviously the report submitted by the Investigation Officer must be treated as a complaint by virtue of explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C.,” the Judge added while directing the Wallajapet Court to find whether prima facie materials are made out against the petitioner within four weeks.