A Magistrate under Section 227 Cr.P.C. must judicially evaluate materials to determine if 'grave suspicion' exists against each accused, rather than acting as a mere conduit for the prosecution, especially when evidence against later-added accused lacks credibility or corroboration.

JUDGMENT :

SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

1. Heard Shri Shikhar Anand, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Jai Prakash, the learned A.G.A. and Sri. Dhirendra Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.

2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of an order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 20, Sultanpur in Criminal Case No.7039 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.81 of 2019 under Section 457, 380 IPC, Police Station- Baldirai, District- Sultanpur whereby an application filed by the petitioners under Section 227 Cr.P.C. seeking their discharge, has been rejected. The petitioners challenged the aforesaid order by filing Criminal Revision No. 43 of 2024, which too has been dismissed by means of a judgment and order dated 17.08.2024 passed by the learned Session Judge, Sultanpur and validity of the revisional order has also been assailed through the present petition.

3. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the opposite party No.2- Tejbahadur against (i) Baburam, aged about 58 years, (ii) Sant Ram, aged about 65 years, (both (i) and (ii) sons of Hublal), (iii) Rinku @ Ashwani, aged about 20 years son of Baburam and (iv) Devendra @ Moti, aged about 25 years, son of Santram, the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively in the present petition.

4. It was stated in the application that the complainant is a permanent resident of House No. 162, Village- Lakehatamafi, Police Station and Tehsil -Baldirai, District- Sultanpur. The opposite party nos. 1 to 4 forcibly attempted to take possession of the house and they instituted Regular Suit No. 76 of 2006, wherein the trial Court passed an order directing the parties to maintain status-quo. On 26.12.2018 at about 7:00 p.m., when the complainant had gone out in connection of his treatment, the opposite party nos.1 to 4 broke open the lock of the house, entered into it and took away a generator along with its parts worth Rs. 80,000/-, three takhats, 50 sacks full of paddy, 40 sacks full of wheat, two benches, one table, a gas stove, a gas cylinder and some other household articles. Upon receiving information from some unnamed persons, the complainant dialed 100 and informed the police. By the time the police arrived, the accused persons had already taken away the articles.

5. The complainant reported the incident to the police but the police did not lodge a First Information Report. Thereafter, on 29.12.2018, he sent information of the incident to the Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur through registered post and when no action was taken on that application, he filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the petitioner nos. 1 to 4. On the said application, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.18, Sultanpur passed an order dated 15.03.2019 directing the police to register a case. In compliance thereof, FIR No.81 of 2019 was registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC against petitioner nos.1 to 4, against whom allegations had been levelled in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

6. During investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded statement of the complainant and he reiterated the allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. In his additional statement, the com