State of Kerala v. Suni @ Sunil 2025 INSC 1260 - S.195A IPC - FIR - Witness Threatening
Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 195A ; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 195,195A [Section 232 BNS ; Section 215, 216 BNSS]- The offence under Section 195A IPC is a cognizable offence the process of criminal law can as well be set in motion by giving information of the commission of such offence to the concerned police officer under Section 154 CrPC. It is only by way of an additional remedy that Section 195A CrPC permits the threatened witness or any other person acting on his behalf to file a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate to set the process of criminal law in motion - It is not compulsory for a threatened witness or other person to only approach the Magistrate concerned to complain of the offence under Section 195A IPC (Para 29)
Interpretation of Statutes - The shortfalls and lack of lucidity in the statute do not constitute casus omissus, i.e., ‘a case of omission- It is not permissible for the Court to apply the doctrine of casus omissus where the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous as the words used by the statue speak for themselves and it is not the function of the Court to add words or expressions merely to suit what the Court thinks is the intent of the legislature. While interpreting a statute, effort should be made to give effect to each and every word used by the legislature and a construction which attributes redundancy to the legislature should not be accepted except for compelling reasons, such as obvious drafting errors. However, in a situation where it is not an instance of casus omissus by the draftsman of the legislation and there are ample means to gather the clear intention of the lawmakers, the statutory provisions which are seemingly lacking in clarity, but are actually not so, can be synchronized so as to give effect to the legislation as intended, without the Court venturing into the realm of legislative drafting. Such an exercise would only require harmonious construction of the provisions so as to give full effect to the legislation. (Para 27)
Case Info
Case Details
- Case Name: State of Kerala v. Suni @ Sunil.
- Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1260.
- Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar; Justice Alok Aradhe.
- Judgment Date: October 28, 2025.
- Appeals Covered: Criminal Appeal No. … of 2025 [@ SLP (Crl.) No. 6238 of 2024]; and Criminal Appeal Nos. … of 2025 [@ SLP (Crl.) Nos. 8223–8224 of 2025].
Caselaws Cited
- Maktool Singh v. State of Punjab, (1999) 3 SCC 321.
- Salib @ Shalu @ Salim v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 20 SCC 194.
- Union of India v. Ashok Kumar Sharma, (2021) 12 SCC 674.
- S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 1.
- Nathi Devi v. Radha Devi Gupta, (2005) 2 SCC 271.
- High Court decisions discussed:
- Rahul Yadav v. State, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 8271.
- Abdul Razzak v. State of M.P., 2023 SCC OnLine MP 7152; ILR 2024 MP 1067.
- Homnath Niroula v. State of West Bengal, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 732.
- Ramlal Dhakad v. State of M.P., MCRC No. 31316 of 2020 (22.01.2024).
- Neput Rajiyung v. State of Assam, (2023) 6 Gauhati Law Reports 302.
- Sazid v. State of M.P., 2022 SCC OnLine MP 4583.
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 195A, 196–200.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 2(c), 2(d), 2(l); 154, 155, 156; 195(1)(b)(i); 340; 195A (inserted by Act 5 of 2009).
- Kerala Police Act, 2011: Section 120(o).
- First Schedule to CrPC (classification of offences post-Act 2 of 2006).
#SupremeCourt holds that a threatened witness can file FIR alleging offence under Section 195A IPC. It is not compulsory for a threatened witness or other person to only approach the Magistrate concerned. https://t.co/4uDoDnGMgV pic.twitter.com/p6fkgx1wlZ
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) October 28, 2025
