JUDGMENT :

1. Petitioner has challenged order dated 15th of November, 2017, passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Shopian, whereby a direction has been issued to SHO, P/S Shopian, to register an FIR and investigate the matter in terms of Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. Petitioner has filed an additional affidavit throwing challenge to FIR No.291/2017 registered with P/S Shopian for offences under Section 341, 323, 379 RPC, that has been registered pursuant to the aforesaid impugned order.

2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the instant petition are that on 2nd of November, 2017, the respondent No.1 (complainant) filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Shopian, alleging therein that on 30th of October, 2017, while he was travelling from Srinagar to Shopian in his personal vehicle, the vehicle of the petitioner herein, who happened to be posted as Deputy Commissioner, Shopian, at the relevant time, was proceeding behind his vehicle and because the complainant was unable to allow the vehicle of the petitioner to proceed ahead on account of traffic jam, the petitioner became furious. It was further averred in the complaint that on reaching near Mini Secretariat, Shopian, the petitioner got down from his vehicle, stopped the respondent/complainant, thrashed him and took away his five ATM cards, PAN card and identity card. On the basis of these allegations, the respondent (complainant) sought a direction for lodging of FIR against the petitioner herein.

3. Upon receipt of complaint containing the foresaid allegations, the learned Magistrate recorded the preliminary statement of the complainant and sought a report from SHO, P/S Shopian. The report was submitted by SHO, P/S Shopian, whereby he sought further time to collect complete details about the matter. However, learned Magistrate, without waiting for the complete details, proceeded ahead to pass the impugned order thereby issuing a direction to SHO, P/S Shopian, to register FIR in the matter and investigate the same.

4. Petitioner has challenged the impugned order and the FIR registered pursuant thereto on the grounds that the learned Magistrate while passing the impugned order has not followed the provisions of law; that the contents of the complaint do not make out any offence against the petitioner; that no notice was issued by the Magistrate to the petitioner before passing the impugned order; that while passing the impugned order, the binding precedents of the Supreme Court and the High Court have been overlooked by the learned Magistrate.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the record of the court below.

6. The main contention that has been urged during the course of arguments by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate prior to directing registration of FIR in terms of Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C has, proceeded to record preliminary statement of the complainant and once the learned Magistrate has chosen to record preliminary statement of the complaint, he could not have passed a direction under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C directing the police to register the FIR.

7. In order to test merits of this argument, it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate has in the instant issued a direction in terms of Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C to the police to register the FIR. The said provision finds its place in Chapter XIV of the Jammu and Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure, 1989, which was applicable at the relevant time. Section 156 of the Code reads as under :

“156. Investigation into cognizable cases.-

(1) Any officer-in-charge of a police station may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate any cognizable case which a Court having jurisdiction over the local area within the local limits of such station would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XV relating to the place of in