SUSHIL HARKAULI, J.

( 1 ) THE writ petitioner moved an application dated 23-8-2000 under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. before the Judicial Magistrate alleging that the respondents 4 to 6 herein had threatened and assaulted him, his wife and his brother, and had also damaged his property. It was alleged that the police had refused to register the FIR. It was prayed that a direction be issued by the Magistrate to the police to register the FIR and investigate the case.

( 2 ) THE Magistrate by his order dated 3-1-2001 directed that the application under section 156 (3) be registered in the Court as a criminal complaint and fixed 5-1-2001 for recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr. P. C.

( 3 ) INSTEAD of giving evidence, as required by the Magistrate, the petitioner preferred a criminal revision against the order dated 3-1-2001, which has been dismissed by the District Judge by judgment dated 11-5-2001.

( 4 ) THUS this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the submission that the Magistrate was not right in directing the procedure of a complaint case to be adopted, and that he should have directed the police to register and investigate the case. SECTION 156 (3) Cr. P. C.

( 5 ) ALTHOUGH it may not be strictly necessary for a complainant to approach the police before filing an application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak), but as a matter of convenience and expedition, normally every genuine complainant first attempts to lodge an FIR at the police station. Thus most applications invoking Section 156 (3) contain the averment that the police have (wrongly) refused to register the FIR of the cognizable offence. Section 154 (1) makes it obligatory for officers in charge of police stations to register FIRs of cognizable offences. If the officer in charge of police station refused to do so, the complainant has the remedy under Section 154 (3) Cr. P. C. to send the substance of the FIR to the Superintendent of Police by post who has the power to investigate the offence himself or depute a subordinate officer to investigate. Experience shows that very few complainants avail of this right under Section 154 (3) Cr. P. C. , apparently due to lack of knowledge.

( 6 ) IF even the Superintendent of Police also fails to act, in such a situation a complainant, if he wishes to pursue the matter further, adopts one of the following two alternatives. Either he seeks a direction under Section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. or he files complaint under Chapter XV Cr. P. C. before the Magistrate.

( 7 ) THE causes for non-registration of FIR at police stations in cognizable case can vary widely. The overworked police may be indifferent to the common mans woes, the accused may be influential, registering of FIRs may be refused to keep the crime statistics of that police station low. Also, in some cases the police may be aware of the true state of affairs and may refuse to register false or pre-emptive FIRs.

( 8 ) IN some of such cases the complainants may genuinely require the assistance of the Court by way of a direction to the police to register and investiage the case.

( 9 ) IT is also possible that in some cases the complainant, with a poor or false case, knows that there is little or no possibility of securing a conviction. Therefore instead of filing a criminal complaint under Chapter XV of Cr. P. C. , the complainant seeks the direction under Section 156 (3) so that the accused may be arrested by the police and thereby harassed and humiliated.

( 10 ) SECTION 41 Cr. P. C. gives the power to the police to arrest without warrant in cognizable offences, in cases enumerated in that Section. One such case is of receipt of a "reasonable complaint" or "credible information" or "reasonable suspicion". When a Magistrate directs registration of FIR and investigation, it would be a little difficult for the police officer of the rank of inspector or sub-inspector to still contend that the com

Click Here to Read the rest of this document