The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 28) held that threatening a witness under Section 195A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a cognizable offence, thereby empowering the police to register an FIR and investigate directly without waiting for a formal complaint from the court.

A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe set aside a Kerala High Court judgment that had held otherwise — that the police could not register an FIR under Section 195A IPC and that such cases required a written complaint from the concerned court under Sections 195 and 340 of the CrPC.

Disagreeing with this interpretation, the Supreme Court clarified that Section 195A IPC was intentionally introduced as a separate, self-contained offence to protect witnesses and ensure their safety. Unlike offences under Sections 193–196 IPC (relating to giving or fabricating false evidence), which are non-cognizable and require a court complaint, Section 195A IPC is cognizable, enabling the police to act immediately when a witness reports threats or coercion.

“Section 195A IPC was conceptualized as an offense distinct and different from those under Sections 193, 194, 195 and 196 IPC. Those offenses required a complaint to be made only by those named in Section 195(1)(b)(i) CrPC and they were all non-cognizable offenses. However, an offense under Section 195A IPC is cognizable and pertains to inducing a person to give false evidence by intimidating them with threat of injury to person, reputation or property, or to anyone in whom that person is interested,” the Bench observed.

Emphasizing the practical necessity of direct police intervention, the Court noted that compelling a threatened witness to first approach the court for a complaint would “cripple and hamper” the justice process.

“Requiring that person to go before the concerned court and inform it about the threat, thereby necessitating a complaint under Section 195(1)(b)(i) along with an inquiry under Section 340 CrPC, would only hamper the process,” the judgment stated.

Reiterating that Section 195A IPC is a cognizable offence, the Court affirmed the police’s authority to act under Sections 154 and 156 of the CrPC without judicial sanction.

“The undeniable fact remains that the offence under Section 195A IPC is cognizable, and once that is so, the power of the police to take action in relation thereto under Sections 154 and 156 CrPC cannot be doubted,” the Bench underscored.

Background

The case arose from a State appeal challenging a Kerala High Court decision granting bail to an accused booked for threatening a prosecution witness (approver) in a murder trial. The High Court had reasoned that police lacked authority to register an FIR under Section 195A IPC, holding that only the court could file a complaint for such an offence.

The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that the High Court’s view was contrary to the legislative intent of Section 195A. Setting aside the order, the Bench clarified that the police are fully empowered to register and investigate FIRs under Section 195A IPC.

The Court allowed the State’s appeal and directed the respondent-accused to surrender before the trial court within two weeks.

Case: State of Kerala v. Suni @ Sunil & Connected Case