S. S. M. QUADRI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application, filed under S. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr. P. C.) praying to quash the proceedings connected with the order dated 25-1-1989 in S. C. (SR) No. 138 of 1989 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad and consequently the F. I. R. dated 25-1-1989 in Crime No. 23 of 1989 of Marredpally Police Station, Secunderabad. 1a. Sri T. K. Kodandaram, the party in person urged the following two contentions (1) Unless the complainant is examined under S. 200, Cr. P. C. the learned Magistrate cannot refer the case to the police for investigation, so the order dated 25-1-1989 referring the complaint to police is illegal and all consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed. (2) The action of the Station House Officer, Marredpally Police Station, Secunderabad, (third respondent herein) in registering the complaint is illegal as a private complaint cannot be converted into a police case under S. 190 (1) (b), Cr. P. C. , so the F. I. R. issued by the third respondent on 25-1-1989 in Crime No. 23 of 1989 of Marredpally Police Station, has to be quashed.

( 2 ) THE learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the order passed by the learned Magistrate is in accordance with law and he had strictly followed the procedure contemplated by the Code of Criminal Procedure. His further submission is that at the state of investigation the High Court will not interfere with the investigation by the police, Sri L. Nageswara Rao, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent adopts the arguments of the Public Prosecutor and submits that the criminal petition is without merit and the same may be dismissed.

( 3 ) ON these contentions the questions that arise for consideration are : (1) Whether the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate, dated 25-1-1989 passed without examining the complainant under S. 200, Cr. P. C. and referring the complaint under S. 156 (3), Cr. P. C. to police for investigation and report is legal. (2) Whether the F. I. R. issued by the third respondent on 25-1-1989 on the basis of the referred complaint is liable to be quashed.

( 4 ) TO answer these questions, it would be necessary to refer to the facts giving rise to this application. One P. Anjinamma was the owner of premises bearing Municipal No. 10-2-91, situated at West Marredpally, Secunderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that the said P. Anjinamma had bequeathed the said house in favour of his daughter Smt. P. Urmila wife of the petitioner under a registered Will dated 4-1-1980; she entrusted the management of the said house to the petitioner and he is looking after the same. He invested an amount of Rs. 50,000/- for repairs and refurnishing and let out the down stairs portion to three tenants and upstairs portion of the said premises to a voluntary organisation "weavers". The fourth respondent who is alleged to have given up his Hindu faith and thus lost right to inherit the property from his parents, filed a complaint against the petitioner under Ss. 120b, 465, 471, 474 read with 420 and 418, I. P. C. in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. That was numbered as C. C. (SR) No. 138 of 1989 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. The grievance of the petitioner is that when the petitioner appeared before the learned magistrate he refused to hear the petitioner and on 25-1-1989 passed order for investigation by and report of the police under S. 156 (3), Cr. P. C. even without examining the complainant (fourth respondent ). The Inspector of Police, Marredpally (sixth respondent herein) registered the case as Crime No. 23 of 1989 under Ss. 120-B, 465, 471, 474 read with 420 and 418, I. P. C. on the basis of the said order of the learned Magistrate referring the complaint to police treating it as information under S. 154, Cr. P. C. and issued F. I. R. , which is alleged to be mala fide.

( 5 ) FIRST I shall take up the first question. Chapter XV of Cr. P. C. deals with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document