2010 Supreme(All) 3025

[2010(8) ADJ 37 (NOC)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SHRI KANT TRIPATHI, J.
DEVENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS ....Revisionists
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER ....Opposite Parties
(Criminal Revision No. 3548 of 2010, decided on 6th September, 2010)

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 154, 155(2) and 156(3)—(Indian) Penal Code, 1860—Sections 323, 452, 308, 504 and 506—FIR—Investigation—Application for—Allowed by Addl. CJM—Contention that respondent No. 2 had already lodged a non-cognizable report under Section 155 of Cr.P.C.—Therefore, respondent No. 2 could an application under Section 155 of Cr.P.C.—But, he moved application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., which was not maintainable—Further, submission that when a non-cognizable report registered—No question for registration of FIR—In application filed under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.he specifically stated that her allegations not correctly recorded by police in NCR—She, therefore, moved application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.—With allegations with cognizable offences committed by revisionist—At stage of passing an order under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.—Magistrate not to carry out meticulous inquiry for finding truth in allegations made in application—It has to be taken at its face value—Whether application discloses commission of cognizable offence or not—If answer is in affirmative—Magistrate may order for investigation—No interference warranted.

       Revision Dismissed.