The applicant sought to set aside a magistrate order treating his Section 156(3) CrPC petition as a complaint instead of directing investigation, and to direct FIR registration. The court held the magistrate had discretion and dismissed the application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29767 of 2019 Applicant :- Siya Ram Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Kumar,Sher Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to set-aside the order dated 6.5.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Jaunpur in Misc. Application No. 101 of 2019. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondent no.2, Station House Officer, Police Station Sigra, Mau, Jaunpur to lodge the F.I.R.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Chief Judicial Magistrate treated the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as complaint on the basis of insufficient ground while the application discloses a cognizable offence. There is necessity of investigation in the matter by the police. The Magistrate concerned has passed the impugned order without applying judicial mind.
On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that though Police is bound to register F.I.R. in a case of cognizable offence yet if the concerned Magistrate has taken cognizance on the application under Section 156(3) CrPC treating the same as complaint and has entered into Chapter XV of CrPC, the order passed by the concerned Magistrate cannot be said to be illegal. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference of this Court.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. As per the settled legal position, the Court / Magistrate is not always bound to pass order for registering the case and investigation on the application under Section 156(3) CrPC disclosing a cognizable offence. It may exercise its discretion judiciously and if it is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be appropriate to treat the application as a complaint case then the Magistrate may proceed with according to the procedure provided under Chapter XV of CrPC. Further, it is open to the applicant to raise the question before the court concerned at the appropriate stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.
The application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.9.2019/safi
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court is justified in refusing to set aside the order treating the Section 156(3) application as a complaint and directing FIR registration.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Siya Ram Maurya
State Of U.P.
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
