Back
2016 Supreme(All) 3562
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J.
Kamla Devi - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. And 4 Others - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application No. - 22817 of 2016
Decided On : 04-08-2016
For the Applicant :- Surendra Singh
For the Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
The court has discretion in allowing applications under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and should not permit them unless there is something unusual and extraordinary warranting a direction to the police to register a case.
Headnote:
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. - Application for registering incident as complaint - Court's discretion in allowing application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant moved an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. regarding an incident that happened inside her house, seeking to register it as a complaint case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the alleged acts were committed inside the house and not in a public place, and the accused was sought to be implicated for an offense under section 3(1) 10 SC/ST Act, which was not applicable in the matter. The court also noted that the facts were within the knowledge and control of the applicant, and there was no unusual or extraordinary circumstance warranting the direction to the police to register a case.
Issues: The issue was whether the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should be allowed to register the incident as a complaint case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of 'Sukhwasi v. State of U.P., 2007(59) ACC 739' and held that applications under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly and not allowed unless there is something unusual and extraordinary warranting a direction to the police to register a case.
Final Decision: The court found no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order and dismissed the application.
Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the records.
2. The application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., moved by applicant regarding incident happened inside her house in her presence, was registered as complaint case by impugned order dated 17.5.2016 passed by 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda. This order of registering the application as complaint is under challenge in present proceeding.
3. This contention of learned AGA appears not unacceptable that according to said application alleged overt acts were committed inside house, and not at any public place or in public view, but applicant had tried to implicate accused for offence under section 3(1) 10 SC/ST Act, which is not applicable in such matter.
4. If facts of application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. is taken to be true, in that case also everything relating to fact is within knowledge of applicant and every evidence relating to it is within her control. There is nothing new that can be exposed after investigation. The trial court has passed order of registering aforesaid application as complaint after considering several judgement of this Court and Apex Court, in which one judgement is of this Court namely, 'Sukhwasi v. State of U.P., 2007(59) ACC 739' in which it has been held as under:
"Applications under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. are coming in torrents. Provisions under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly. They should not be used unless there is something unusual and extra ordinary like miscarriage of justice which warrants a direction to the Police to register a case. Such application should not be allowed because the law provides them with an alternative remedy of filing a complaint, therefore, recourse should not normally be permitted for availing the provisions of section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
The reference is, therefore, answered in the manner that it is not incumbent upon a Magistrate to allow an application section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and there is no such legal mandate".
5. There appears no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order to exercise inherent jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore this application is dismissed.
