The Magistrate has the jurisdiction under Section 156 (3) of the Cr. P. C. to direct the police to register the case, and the officer-in-charge of the police station is under a legal obligation to register the case for the purpose of investigation.

Heard Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava learned counsel for the revisionist learned A. G. A. for State and Sri Amar Saran learned counsel for the op posite parties Nos: 2to 17.

2. The revisionist appears to have moved an application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr. P. C. for directing the police to register the case and investigate the same. The learned Magistrate vide his order dated 20- 9-91. passed the following order:

"so Hathras Junction to register and inves tigate the matter and report by 21 -10-91.

Sd/-A. K. Verma

20-9-91 II Addl. ,

Munsif Magistrate Hathras.

A Revision was preferred by opposite parties Nos. 2 to 17 and the learned Sessions Judge, Aligarh vide his judgment and order dated 28-11-92 al lowed the revision relying upon the decision of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 28259 of 1992 Smt Jamni v. State of U. P. decided on 2-7-92 in which learned Single Judge of-this Court held that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction under Section 156 (3), Cr. P. C. to direct the police to register the case. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the revisional court the present, revision has been filed.

3. It is contended that the controversy has been set at jest by a Division Bench decision of this Court in Suraj Mal and others v. State Of UP. and others, 1993 (30) ACC 81 wherein the Court held that such direction could be given by the Magistrate. The Division Bench further held that in our opinion, even if these was no direction by the Magistrate to register the case, the of ficer-in-charge of the police Station

is under legal obligation to register the case for the purpose of investigation in the, same way as f if it was reported to him under Section 154 (1), Cr. P. C. In view of the fact that the controversy. has been set a rest by the decision of the Division Bench of the this Court in the case of Suraj Mal (supra) the revision is disposed, of at the admission stage. The revision is allowed. The judg ment and- order of the Revisional Court (Addl. Session Judge) is set aside and that of the learned Magistrate dated, 20-9-91 is restored. Revision allowed.

.