The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the magistrate to apply their mind before ordering an investigation under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and to reflect the same in the order, ensuring a detailed examination of the complaint and the allegations contained therein.

ORDER :

1. This common order shall govern the disposal of M. Cr. C. No. 11019/12 and M. Cr. C. No. 10799/2012.

2. These petitions (M. Cr. C. No. 11019/12 and M. Cr. C. No. 10799/2012) under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code have been preferred by the applicants/accused against the order dated 17-5-2012 passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Lakhnadon, District Seoni, whereby learned JMFC on the application filed under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code by the complainant/respondent No. 2, directed the Station House Officer, Lakhnadon to register the FIR on the complaint and investigate the matter and file final report before the Court.

3. Brief facts of the case which are relevant for disposal of the case are that the complainant Harish Chandra Ahirwar filed an application under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code before the learned JMFC, Lakhnadon along with a complaint averring that he had an agricultural land bearing survey No. 105/5 area 0.65 hectare situated at village Pipariya, Patwari Halka No. 8, Chamari, Tehsil Chapra, District Seoni. On 20-4-2006 applicant Chetram took revenue papers of his aforesaid land, ration card, his identity card, photo and also got his signature on a stamp paper on the pretext to get him bank loan available. However, despite repeated reminders applicant/accused Chetram neither made loan available to him from the Bank, nor did he return his documents, therefore, on 16-6-2007 a written report in this regard was also lodged by him at P.S. Lakhnadon. On 24-3-2012 when he went to area Patwari to get new loan pustika, he informed him that the said land has been mutated in the name of applicant/accused Smt. Chandra Kanta Bokade on the basis of registered sale deed. On that he got copy of the said sale deed from Registrar Office Lakhnadon. Thereafter, he came to know that applicant Gokul Prasad the then Patwari had wrongly issued the sale slip of his land and applicants Chetram Bakode and Smt. Chandrakanta in connivance with Document Writer Vijay Kumar Soni prepared forged sale deed and executed the sale deed by producing one imposter as complainant before the Sub-Registrar, where applicant Domanlal and Taam Singh also signed that sale deed and identified that person as complainant. Thus, applicants Chetram Bakode and Smt. Chandrakanta in connivance with Vijay Kumar Soni, Gokul Prasad, Doman Lal, Taam Singh and Sub-Registrar T. L. Bhoyar executed said sale deed of the complainant’s land in favour of applicant Chandrakanta Bakode and on the basis of said forged sale deed Smt. Chandrakanta got her name recorded on complainant’s land in the revenue papers. So action be taken against them. Learned JMFC by order dated 17-5-2012 observing that from perusal of complaint and documents produced along with the complaint the incident appears to be of serious in nature directed the Station House Officer, Lakhnadon to register the FIR on the complaint and investigate the matter and file final report before the Court.

4. Being aggrieved from that order applicant Gokul Prasad filed M. Cr. C. No. 10799/2012 and applicants Chetram Bakode, Smt. Chandrakanta Bakode, Vijay Kumar Soni, Doman Lal and Tam Singh filed M. Cr. C. No. 11019/2012.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that from perusal of the complaint it appears that the complainant filed the complaint to take cognizance for the offence punishable under section 420, 467, 471, 506-B of the Indian Penal Code. Offence punishable under section 467 is triable by Court of Sessions and in that case according to section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code learned JMFC is not entitled to send the complaint for investigation without examining the complainant and his witnesses under section 200 and 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Even before sending complaint for registering FIR, magistrate ought to record the statement of accused/applicants also. He further stated that complainant also filed the complaint against Patwari and Su