Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Hari Dayal Rai – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 02.05.2017 passed in connection with Telco P.S. Case No. 33 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 228 of 2016 whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 420, 506, 120B, 341 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons inter alia against the petitioner in connection with the said case.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons deceived the complainant and thereby induced the complainant and the witnesses of the case to the tune of Rs.17,90,000/- by alluring them to invest the same with him with lucrative return which he assured to give them from his financial and trading business. The complainant filed C-1 Case No. 2840 of 2015 which upon being referred to police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Proce
The court ruled that failure to file a supporting affidavit under Section 156(3) does not necessarily invalidate proceedings if substantial evidence of wrongdoing exists against the accused.
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 magistrate must ensure a complaint discloses a cognizable offence before directing police investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and a detailed affidavit is required to support such applicat....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for the Magistrate to apply judicial mind before directing investigation under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the wide powers of the Magistrat....
The duty of the Magistrate to verify the truth and veracity of the allegations, the requirement for prior applications under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) of Cr.P.C 1973, and the need for the Magistrate....
The absence of a mandatory affidavit when filing for a FIR under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. invalidates cognizance of the case, showcasing the necessity for procedural compliance in criminal proce....
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
