Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 764
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. DEVADASS, J.
P. Mani - Petitioner
vs.
V. Ganeshkumar - Respondent
Criminal Revision Case No.224 of 2016
Decided On : 31-03-2016
For the petitioner: Mr.A.Ansar
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 200 - Section 190(1)(a) ,204 and 203 - Cognizance – Demand of Dowry - Complainant and his two witnesses and recorded their sworn statement - Perusing complaint and the said statement learned Magistrate dismissed complaint on ground that place of occurrence is District Court Campus where many people will frequent not examining any one of public creates doubt - learned counsel for revision petitioner contended that at this stage Magistrate has to take allegations in complaint and in sworn statement of witnesses as such at their face value and see that whether prima facie it discloses any offence - Inadequacy or adequacy weight age o said materials will not be a relevant matter at this stage - Whether order of dismissal passed by learned Magistrate suffers from any legality or impropriety - Held, In none of these stages Code has provided for hearing summoned accused for obvious reasons because this is only a preliminary stage and stage of hearing of accused would only arise at a subsequent stage provided for in latter provision in Code - It is true as held by this Court in Mathews case before issuance of summons Magistrate should be satisfied that there is sufficient ground for proceeding with the complaint but that satisfaction is to be arrived at by inquiry conducted by him as contemplated under Sections 200 and 202 and the only stage of dismissal of complaint arises under Section 203 of Code at which stage accused has no role to play therefore question of the accused on receipt of summons approaching the Court and making an application for dismissal of complaint under Section 203 of Code for a reconsideration of material available on record is impermissible because by then Section 203 is already over and Magistrate has proceeded further to Section 204 Stage - Criminal Revision is allowed
This revision arises out of dismissal of a complaint filed by the revision petitioner.
2. As between the revision petitioner and the respondent there is a money dispute. In the circumstances, the complainant/revision petitioner lodged a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. III, Coimbatore, alleging that on 26.02.2013, at about 11 a.m, while he and his son Senthil Kumar were worshipping in the Pillaiyar Temple situate within the District Court Campus, Coimbatore, the accused/respondent came, abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences, if he demands money back.
3. The learned Magistrate examined the complainant and his two witnesses and recorded their sworn statement. Perusing the complaint and the said statement, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint on the ground that the place of occurrence is District Court Campus where many people will frequent not examining any one of the public creates doubt.
4. This revision is to revise the said order.
5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that at this stage the Magistrate has to take the allegations in the complaint and in the sworn statement of witnesses as such at their face value and see that whether prima facie it discloses any offence. Inadequacy or adequacy, weightage of the said materials will not be a relevant matter at this stage.
6. In this connection, the learned counsel cited Adalat Prasad .v. Rooplal Jindal and others '(2004 (4) CTC 608)'.
7. I have anxiously considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the allegations in the complaint and other connected materials on record and also the decision cited.
8. Now the question is whether the order of dismissal passed by the learned Magistrate suffers from any legality or impropriety.
9. Filing of a private complaint is contemplated under Section 200 Cr.P.C It is a private prosecution. Taking of cognizance upon private complaint is provided in Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C. The enquiry on a private complaint whether for a warrant offence or for summons case is contemplated under Sections 200 – 202 Cr.P.C. If there is a ground to proceed further, in other words, if there is a prima facie case as to an alleged offence, then the Magistrate has to take the case on file under Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C., and issue summons to the accused under Section 204 Cr.P.C. If there is no prima facie case, he can dismiss the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C, by giving his brief reasons for so doing.
10. Now, for enquiry under Sections 200 – 202 Cr.P.C what are the materials that a Magistrate has to consider.
11. In this connection, it is opposite here to notice the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in Adalat Prasad .v. Rooplal Jindal and others '(2004 (4) CTC 608)'.
“14. Section 202 contemplates : postponement of issue of process: It provides that if the Magistrate on receipt of a complaint, if he thinks fit, to postpone the issuance of process against the accused and desires further inquiry into the case either by himself or directs an investigation to be made by a Police Officer or by other person as he thinks fit for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may do so. In that process, if he thinks it fit, he may even take evidence of witnesses on oath, and after such investigation, inquiry and the report of the Police, if sought for by the Magistrate and if he finds no sufficient ground for proceeding, he can dismiss the complaint by recording briefly the reasons for doing so as contemplated under Section 203 of the Code.
15. But after taking cognizance of the complaint and examining the complainant and the witnesses, if he is satisfied that there is sufficient ground to proceed with the complaint, he can issue process by way of summons under Section 204 of the Code. Therefore, what is necessary or a condition precedent for issuing process
