ORDER :

1. A second complaint by the defacto complainant referred under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation without noticing the earlier complaint on the same set of facts and transaction and the cognizance taken thereof for the offence under Section 415, 420 r/w Section 34 IPC is under challenge on the ground of suppression of earlier complaint. It is submitted that it really amounts to abuse of process of the court and cannot be sustained and took support from the legal position laid down in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P. [2015 (2) KLT 451 (SC)], wherein the Apex Court observed that the practice of filing complaints in a routine manner without taking responsibility and reference of the same under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should be avoided and the Magistrate can in proper cases insist the complainant to file an affidavit in support of the allegations along with the complaint. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted below:

“27. In our considered opinion, a stage has come in this country, where Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. applications are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. Tha