Back
2002 Supreme(Cal) 105
High Court Of Calcutta
Arunabha Barua
KRISHNA CHANDRA CHAUDHURY - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
C. R. R. 1727 Of 1997
Decided On : 02/19/2002
DEBASIS ROY, KRISHNA GHOSH, S.MOITRA
A Magistrate has the authority to direct the police to register a case and investigate it based on a complaint, even if the Magistrate does not take cognizance of the offense.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 156(3) - INVESTIGATION - POWER OF MAGISTRATE TO DIRECT POLICE TO REGISTER CASE - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN MADHU BALA V. SURESH KUMAR AND ORS. RELIED UPON.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, accused of assaulting and abusing a Scheduled Caste employee, challenged the order of the Magistrate directing the police to investigate the complaint under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, claiming that the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction and that the investigation was an abuse of process.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Magistrate's order was legal and valid, as the complaint disclosed cognizable offenses and the Magistrate had the authority to direct the police to treat the complaint as an FIR and investigate it.
Issues: 1. Whether the Magistrate erred in directing the police to investigate the complaint under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. 2. Whether the investigation was an abuse of process.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Madhu Bala v. Suresh Kumar and Ors., which held that a Magistrate can direct the police to register a case and investigate it based on a complaint, even if the Magistrate does not take cognizance of the offense. 2. The Court held that the complaint disclosed cognizable offenses and that the Magistrate had the authority to direct the police to treat the complaint as an FIR and investigate it.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the revisional application and upheld the Magistrate's order directing the police to investigate the complaint.
( 1 ) THIS revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for the purpose of quashing of the investigational proceedings of Bhatar P. S. Case No. 48 dated 9. 5. 97 under sections 325/326/329/347/467/469 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the corresponding proceedings of G. R. Case No. 609/97 of the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan and this, is directed against Order dated 25. 4. 97 passed by Sri T. K. Das, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-in-Charge, Burdwan in FIR Case No. 226/97 whereby the learned Magistrate passed an order in terms of section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure pursuant to which the aforesaid case was registered for investigation.
( 2 ) PETITIONER, Krishna Chandra Choudhury, was to run a petrol pump. The complainant, Nityananda Saha, who was a Scheduled Caste, was a clerk over there at a monthly salary of Rs. 1,500/ -. In short, the incident was over severe assault on the complainant by the petitioner because the complainant had failed to record inflated shortage of petrol in the relevant register of the petrol pump. Besides the abuse and assault the complainant was also forced to sign on a blank stamp paper to execute a document showing debt of Rs. 5,000/- owed by the complainant to the petitioner. The complainant was also subsequently confined in a room and assaulted. Two days later on 21. 3. 97 the complainant informed Bhatar P. S. as also the local Panchayat about the incident and G. D. Entry bearing No. 1125 was registered at Bhatar P. S. For the serious injury sustained by the complainant he was treated at the Burdwan Hospital. As the Bhatar Police was delaying taking any steps on the complaint, the complainant had written to the Superintendent of Police, Burdwan but no steps had been taken against the petitioner-accused. According to the petitioner he was completely innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case. Since no action was taken by the Police on the complaint, the complainant moved the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan with the petition of complaint against the petitioner-accused, Krishna Chandra Choudhury praying for sending the complaint to the O. C. , Bhatar P. S. for investigation under section 156 (3) Cr. PC. On the receipt of the complaint the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-in-Charge, Burdwan sent the said petition of complaint to O. C. , Bhatar P. S. for investigation and report treating the same as FIR.
( 3 ) THE said order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-in-Charge dated 25. 4. 97 has been assailed here in this revision and the order reads as follows :-"received the petition of complaint from one Nityananda Saha against the person named therein with the prayer to send the complaint to the OC, Bhatar PS for investigation under section 156 (3) Cr. PC. Send it to OC, Bhatar PS for investigation and report, treating this as FIR. "
( 4 ) THE only point for determination is, whether the said order dated 25. 4. 97 is legal and valid and whether the investigation proceedings in pursuance thereof should be quashed in the exercise of the power under section 482 Cr. PC by this Court.
( 5 ) THE mainstay of the contention of the petitioner (accused) as voiced by the learned advocate for the petitioner is this. If the factum of a cognizable offence is brought to the notice of police it is incumbent for the police authority to draw up a First Information Report in terms of the information so given. In the event of omission by the police authority to act in terms of the mandate of the Code of Criminal Procedure the remedy does not lie by way of filing a second complaint before the Court praying for a direction under section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for treating the second complaint as First Information Report but the remedy is to move the Court concerned by way of drawing
