HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Farjand Ali, J.
Mathura Devi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its P.p. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5195 of 2021
Decided On : 06-01-2022
Section 156(3) - Criminal Procedure Code - The court quashed the order of the Magistrate and directed the complaint to be sent to the Police Station for registration of the FIR, citing the commission of a cognizable offence and the disregard of the legal position established by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's case.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a complaint alleging a cognizable offence, but the Magistrate initiated an inquiry under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. instead of sending the complaint to the Police for registration of the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Magistrate's action was dehors to the legal position and in blatant disregard of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's case. The court quashed the Magistrate's order and directed the complaint to be sent to the Police Station for registration of the FIR.
Issues: The issue was whether the Magistrate's initiation of an inquiry under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. instead of sending the complaint to the Police for registration of the FIR was in line with the legal provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when a complaint reveals the commission of a cognizable offence, the Magistrate is obligated to send the complaint to the Police Station for registration of the FIR, as per the legal position established by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the Magistrate's order, and directed the complaint to be sent to the Police Station for registration of the FIR, with the investigation to be conducted by an Officer not below the rank of Additional S.P., and to be concluded within three months.
ORDER
1. By way of the instant miscellaneous petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 07.08.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dudu, District Jaipur. In a complaint's report filed by complainant, the petitioner Mathura Devi made a prayer to send the complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for lodging the FIR and connecting the investigation.
2. Heard, perused the material available on record.
3. It is revealing that the petitioner Mathura Devi had preferred a complaint before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dudu, District Jaipur, alleging therein that on 29.07.2021, the accused person barged into her house and outraged her modesty, she was manhandled and subjected to abusive language. The allegations of skirmishing, threatening and beating through kicks were also levelled therein. A bare perusal of the report discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the prayer was made by the complainant to send the matter for registration of the FIR. It is also mentioned in the complaint that she had sent report of the incident to the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur (Rural) but no heed has been paid by him.
4. Learned counsel submits that instead of sending the matter to the Police for registering the FIR and conducting investigation, the learned Magistrate opted to record the statement of the complainant, which was not warranted by the law as the bare perusal of the report, itself discloses commission of a cognizable offence.
5. Learned counsel drew attention of this Court towards the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., wherein, she has categorically alleged regarding commission of a cognizable offence. He submits that compact disk was also produced before the Court as a piece of evidence. However, the learned Magistrate, instead of sending it to the Police under Section 156 of Cr.P.C. initiated an enquiry under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., which is a blatant disregard of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2012) 4 SCC 1, as well as of the mandate of Section 154 of the Cr.P.C.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the report sent to the Superintendent of Police, the complaint made to the Judicial Magistrate, the allegations made therein supported with affidavit, the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and the order dated 07.08.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate.
7. It is well settled that the reliability, truthfulness or the genuineness of the allegations made in the report / complaint is a task to be undertaken during the course of the investigation.
8. Whenever, a complaint / report is moved before the Judicial Magistrate with the prayer to send the same to the Police for registration of the FIR and investigation, if a bare perusal of the complaint / report reveals commission of a cognizable offence, the Judicial Magistrate was left with no other option but to send the same to the Police Station for registration of the FIR. In this matter as is observed earlier a perusal of the complaint reveals commission of a cognizable offence thus action taken and the order passed by the learned Magistrate is dehors to the legal position and in blatant disregard of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's case, therefore, the action taken by the Magistrate and the order passed by him, whereby, the inquiry was initiated and the matter was sent under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. to the Police is hereby quashed and set aside and it is directed that the Magistrate shall send the complaint to the Police Station concerned for registration of the FIR. Since the allegations therein are made against the Police Officers of Police Station Dudu, therefore it is directed that the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur (Rural) shall entrust the investigation to an Officer not below the rank of Additional S.P..
The Magistrate must register an FIR when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, without examining the truthfulness of the allegations at that stage.
A Magistrate has discretion under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to either take cognizance or direct investigation by police, thus not legally bound to register an FIR.
The Station House Officer is obligated to register an FIR upon receiving information about a cognizable offence, and the learned Magistrate must independently assess the complaint before directing po....
A Magistrate cannot revert to the pre-cognizance stage after taking cognizance of a complaint, making the order to register an FIR legally untenable.
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to determine if a prima facie case exists for police investigation, requiring sufficient evidence from the complainant.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.