Legal action against corrupt police officer
A corrupt police officer has added my name to a false FIR . Even , I was not present at the place of incident . I have sufficient proof to show my alibi like Railway ticket , informatory petition etc. What should I do ?
You can apply for quashing of the said FIR in High court but prior to that you shall apply for anticipatory bail before the Honourable Court.
Report to 100 number and meet SHO of station officer. At the same time hire an advocate to take legal action against court
Upon registration of a false case, depending on the seriousness of the case, you must first apply for anticipatory bail to the session’s court or the high court. Before applying for anticipatory bail make sure that the complaint discloses a cognizable - non bailable offence.
There can be two situations, first, where case has been filed due to pressure and nuisance value or is of such a nature that after registration, it discloses that it cannot be investigated by the police or has been investigated already by another police wing or police station, such cases can be speedily disposed of by making entry in the police diary or register or form prescribed with a quick report to the magistrate mentioning that the said case cannot be investigated. This is the procedure prescribed under section 157 of the code of criminal procedure. However, in case where you know the false complainant is creating mischief and not allowing police to do its work or the police does not cooperate, one may apply for quashing under article 226 of the constitution read with section 482 of the code of criminal procedure.
Some high courts in India permit only an application under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure. In cases where a magistrate is misled into passing orders under section 156(3) of the code of criminal procedure to register an FIR to the police, the order can be challenged under revision jurisdiction under section 397 of the code of criminal procedure at the session court. Jurisdiction exists with high court also, but high court prefers you to go to sessions first. Though scope of revision has been widened, it is often noted that session’s judges adopt a very pedantic approach and limit them to the aspect of correctness of an order. This approach is highly erroneous because these days it is a fashion to hide facts and orders or sidetrack them and mislead magistrates into passing orders. In such cases if sessions judges become technical then the whole purpose of a revision application is demeaned. Due to this reasons many people file a criminal application directly at the high court under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure where high court has inherent powers and wide powers.
Another remedy to challenge such an order is under article 227 of the constitution read with section 482 of the code of criminal procedure. An order of issuance of process under section 204 of the code of criminal procedure - when magistrate takes cognizance himself is also challenged in a manner similar to the order under section 156(3) of the code of criminal procedure. Many false complainants also get processes issued by concealing facts. For concealing facts and playing fraud upon court - a remedy is available for invoking contempt powers or for making an application for perjury (which means cheating the court). However the magnitude of fraud played on the court is more important and every situation has to be analysed per se.
Recently, Supreme Court has passed a judgment ruling that except in the case of very serious crimes like rape, murder, house breaking, robbery etc, a preliminary enquiry has to be done before registration of an FIR. Holding further, Supreme Court said that a policeman would be liable for prosecution if he files a charge-sheet against a person despite knowing his innocence. 
 PERUMAL v. JANAKI (Criminal Appeal No.169 of 2014)
Book a phone consultation with a top-rated lawyer on Lawfarm.