A court here has directed that an FIR be registered against a police official for allegedly assaulting a dog and said giving a clean chit to an accused, without lodging a police report, could result in "disastrous consequences, further quelling the faith of the common man in the administration of criminal justice".

The court also observed that police often resort to "bypassing" the law by preparing closure reports under the title of inquiry, prior to the registration of an FIR.

Metropolitan Magistrate Bharat Aggarwal was hearing two applications seeking directions for the registration of an FIR against Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Ravindra, posted at the Jafrabad police station here, for "mercilessly" beating up a dog with a lathi on January 10 last year.

A video purportedly of the incident had gone viral on social media platforms.

"Preparation of closure reports prior to registration of an FIR with the title of 'inquiry' is impermissible, yet often resorted to by the police, bypassing the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)," the magistrate said in an order passed on February 13.

He also said the role of police is limited to the execution of the law and does not involve interpreting it.

"The procedure of conducting inquiries and handing over clean chits to the proposed accused without even registering an FIR and without conducting an investigation in the prescribed manner can lead to disastrous consequences, further quelling the faith of the common man in the administration of criminal justice," the magistrate said.

Rapping the Delhi Police, he said, "It appears that in the garb of inquiry, the police has rather conducted an investigation after the receipt of the notice issued by this court for the filing of a status report or an action-taken report." "Conducting an investigation in cognisable offences prior to the registration of an FIR is neither recognised nor permissible under the law," the court added.

It further said the inquiry report reflected that police had "overstepped into the shoes of the adjudicator" while concluding that the ASI had exercised his right of private defence and committed no offence.

"The station house officer (SHO), Jafrabad is hereby directed to register an FIR in the present case and file a compliance report by February 20," the court said.

It added that it was a case where police had presented several aspects in the inquiry report to defend the ASI.

"Accordingly, it is deemed fit to order that the deputy commissioner of police (DCP) concerned may consider that the investigation in the present case be done by an independent unit to ensure that the investigation is carried out fairly, expeditiously and impartially with a view to elicit the truth," the court said.

It observed that cognisable and non-cognisable offences were clearly committed, which required an investigation pursuant to the registration of an FIR.

The court said the authenticity of the video that purportedly captured the incident had to be established.

It highlighted that the legislature's intention while drafting the penal provisions pertaining to prevention of cruelty against animals was not limited to creating deterrence among those who inflict violence upon the voiceless, but also to make them face the rigours of criminal law.

According to the inquiry report, the police official had not committed any offence as he had acted in private defence and there was no permanent or grievous injury to the dog.

The report had also said the dog was "ferocious" and not friendly.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.