Supreme Court Summons ACP Ernakulam Over Failure to Register FIR Despite Complaint Received by Post
The Supreme Court found Kerala's affidavit on FIR non-registration thoroughly unsatisfactory and directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ernakulam, to appear personally on 15 May 2026.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R. Mahadevan, on 8 May 2026 directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police, District Ernakulam, Kerala, to appear personally before the Court on 15 May 2026. The direction came after the bench found the State of Kerala's affidavit — filed in compliance with an earlier order dated 2 April 2026 — wholly inadequate on the central question of why a formal FIR was not registered upon receipt of a complaint sent by post. The petitioner, Athul Thomas, had approached the Supreme Court challenging an order dated 11 February 2026 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in BA No. 563/2026. Interim protection granted to the petitioner on 19 February 2026 was extended until the next date of listing.
The Complaint and the Admitted Gap in Police Action
The facts before the bench were narrow but pointed. Athul Thomas had sent a complaint by post. It is an admitted fact on record that the complaint was received by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, District Ernakulam, Kerala, on 8 January 2026. Despite that receipt, no formal FIR was registered.
The bench had, by its order of 2 April 2026, directed the State of Kerala to file an affidavit explaining this gap. The State filed the affidavit. The bench, after hearing counsel for both sides, found it thoroughly unsatisfactory.
The specific deficiency the bench identified was that the affidavit did not answer the basic point: why, immediately upon receipt of the complaint, a formal FIR was not registered. That question remained unanswered despite the State having been given the opportunity to address it.
Why the Bench Escalated to Personal Presence
Rather than accept a further written response, the bench moved to require the officer personally responsible to appear and explain. The direction is addressed specifically to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, District Ernakulam — the officer whose office received the complaint on 8 January 2026.
The Court's order frames the officer's obligation precisely: to explain why, upon receipt of the complaint through post, no formal FIR was registered. The matter is to be listed at the top of the Board on 15 May 2026, signalling that the bench intends to take up the explanation as the first item of business that day.
Requiring a police officer to appear personally before the Supreme Court is an uncommon step. It reflects the bench's view that a written affidavit from the State was insufficient to account for conduct that the Court considered unexplained, given that the receipt of the complaint was not in dispute.
Interim Protection Continued
The bench also addressed the position of Athul Thomas pending the next hearing. The interim protection that the Court had granted to the petitioner on 19 February 2026 was directed to continue until the next date of listing. The order does not describe the nature of that protection, but it was first granted at the stage when the petitioner challenged the Kerala High Court's order in BA No. 563/2026 — a bail application proceeding.
Proceedings and Representation
The matter is listed as SLP (Crl.) No. 3111/2026, arising from the impugned final judgment and order dated 11 February 2026 in BA No. 563/2026 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam. Two interlocutory applications — IA No. 55345/2026 seeking exemption from filing a certified copy of the impugned judgment, and IA No. 55347/2026 seeking exemption from filing the original typed set — were also on record.
Athul Thomas was represented by Mr. Sachin Patil, AoR, along with Mr. Risvi Muhammed, Mr. Vishnu Priya, and Ms. Maneesha Radakrishan. The State of Kerala and the second respondent were represented by Mr. P.V. Dinesh, Senior Advocate, along with Mr. Harshad V. Hameed, AoR, and several other advocates.