Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Anirban Bhattacharya – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.
1. Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revisional Application under Sections 397 , 401 read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., challenging the legality, correctness, and propriety of an order dated 04.08.2023, passed by the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court-I at Calcutta in Misc. C Case No. 75 of 2023 under Sections 153 /153A/295A/298 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 whereby and whereunder the application u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who works as a Secretary at Bishwa Hindu Parisad (an Organization), lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Shyampukur Police Station, as well as before the Deputy Commissioner of Police on 02.05.2023 and 10.05.2023, respectively, by Speed Post with A/D. The complaints were received by the said authorities. The allegation was to the effect that one Nachiketa Chakraborty (a Bengali singer, composer and musician) during a live concert, tried to provoke the common people, particularly citizens of India and outraged the religious sentiments of the followers of Lord Ram by narrating the following te
The court upheld that a Magistrate's authority under Section 156(3) is limited to cases within territorial jurisdiction, dismissing the application due to lack of substantiated evidence.
The duty of the Magistrate to apply judicial mind while directing the registration of FIRs, and the consequences of filing frivolous and vexatious proceedings.
The court emphasized that a Magistrate must apply judicial discretion and ascertain the existence of a cognizable offence before directing police investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 175(3) of the BNSS to decide whether to register an FIR based on the application, assessing whether a cognizable offense is made out.
Direction for Police Investigation – Option to direct registration of case and its investigation by police should be exercised where some “investigation” is required, which is of a nature that is not....
The Magistrate must judiciously exercise discretion in registering FIRs under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., ensuring that mechanical refusals are avoided when cognizable offences are disclosed.
The court emphasized the necessity of conducting a preliminary inquiry before proceeding with an FIR to prevent abuse of legal process in cases with potential ulterior motives.
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to determine whether to direct an investigation, particularly in civil disputes masquerading as criminal matters.
The court upheld lower courts' discretion in denying FIR registration, ruling that the petitioner had sufficient evidence and means to substantiate his claims without police assistance.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
