IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Farjand Ali, J.
Suresh - Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 7326 of 2023
Decided On : 23-11-2023
JUDGMENT :
Farjand Ali, J.
By way of filing the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 7.11.2023, whereby the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Churu declined to sent the matter for registration of the FIR under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to the Police Station and the complaint was kept for holding enquiry as envisaged under Chapter XV of the Cr.P.C.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the impugned order as well as the copy of complaint-cum-report wherein prayer for sending the matter for registration of the FIR was made.
3. A cursory look over the complaint indicated disclosure of commission of a cognizable offence. The niceties, truthfulness and faisity of the allegations are not required to be examined at this stage rather as per the settled legal preposition if the perusal of the complaint disclosing commission of a cognizable offence then, certainly it is imperative upon the Magistrate concerned to send the matter under Section 156(3) of this Cr.P.C. for registration of the FIR to the Police Station concerned. Examination of truth or genuineness is the subject of investigation, of Course, a formal application of mind is required but at the same time the veracity is not required to be examined. The application of mind to the extent of observing that whether there are allegations or not for the offences which are cognizable is sufficient. This Court in the case of Mathura Devi v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5195/2021 decided on 6.1.2022) has dealt with the identical issues. The relevant part of the said order is felt apt to reproduce here, which is as under:-
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 disclosed commission of a cognizable offence.
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 v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2012) 4 SCC 1, as well as of the mandate of Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. 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 7.8.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate.
It is well settled that the reliability, truthfulness of the genuineness of the allegations made in the report/complaint is a task to be undertaken during t
The Magistrate must register an FIR when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, without examining the truthfulness of the allegations at that stage.
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 establi....
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.
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....
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 court emphasized the importance of correctly applying the provisions of Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for the investigation of cognizable offences and overruled the trial court's decision to order an i....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the Judicial Magistrate to pass a reasoned order before directing the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
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.