Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sheel Nagu, J.
Om Prakash Sharma v. State of M. P. & Another
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 44485 of 2020 (Gwalior);
Decided on 25.3.2021
(1) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 156(3) and 200 -- extent and nature of power -- Magistrate is vested with limited role which is of supervisory nature -- to be sparingly exercised on occasions where police either fails to register FIR or conducts investigation in improper manner. [Paras 8 & 8.1]
(2) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Chap. XII-supervisory power of Magistrate -- object -- to ensure that information regarding commission of cognizable offence received from any source does not go uninvestigated -- cognizable offence is serious enough to not only adversely affect victim but also society at large -- it is sovereign function of State through police to ensure that any cognizable offence whenever and wherever committed, does not go unregistered and uninvestigated by police, untried by competent Court and unpunished if found proved. [Para 9]
(3) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S.156(3) -- scope of power -- incumbent upon Magistrate to not only direct for registration of cognizable offence wherever not registered by police, but also to ensure that investigation conducted by police is fair, expeditious and without any element of prejudice towards anyone, with sole object of reaching truth. [Para 9.1]
(4) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 156(3) --Magistrate seeks report from concerned police station -- necessarily means that if contents of application u/s. 156(3)reveal commission of cognizable offence and no such offence is yet registered, then police is obliged to register offence and thereafter submit report. (2014) 2SCC 1 referred to. [Paras 11 & 11.2]
(5) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 156(3) -- expression "may" -- reveals intention of Legislature to vest discretionary power upon Magistrate to either direct for investigation or to refuse from doing so. [Para 11.1]
(6) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 156(3) -- Constitution of India -- Art.14 -- police seeking and granted various opportunities to file report -- causes delay and uncertainty -- rule of law does not appreciate delay or uncertainty -- it ultimately leads to arbitrariness in functioning of State and its functionaries -- directly offends Art.14. (2006) 8 SCC 1 referred to. [Para 14]
(7) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 156 (3) and 200 -- application u/s. 156(3) filed individually or along with complaint u/s.200 -- statutory obligation of Magistrate in such situation -- guidelines laid down. (2015) 6 SCC 287 and (2013) 6 SCC 384 followed. 2008 CrLJ 472 (All.) relied on. [Para 15.4]
(8) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 156 (3) and 200 -- application u/s. 156(3) and complaint u/s.200 filed simultaneously-- grievance of improper and/or delayed investigation after lodging of FIR -- Magistrate should direct police to submit report -- thereafter pass appropriate remedial directions if report discloses improper or delayed investigation -- Magistrate, after passing such order, can also monitor process of investigation to ensure that it reaches its logical and lawful conclusion -- however, should avoid stepping into shoes of investigating authority -- ought to assume only supervisory role -- in case report requisitioned from police reveals that investigation is being done with promptitude and in accordance with law, application u/s.156(3) should be dismissed by passing short speaking order. [Para 15.4 (B)]
(9) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 156 (3), 200 and 210 -- application u/s. 156(3) and complaint u/s.200 filed simultaneously -- grievance of improper and/or delayed investigation -- as and when report from police is requisitioned, it is presumed that FIR has already been lodged and process of investigation is pending -- bar contained in S.210(1) comes into operation -- Magistrate compelled to put on hold enquiry/trial if commenced pursuant to complaint u/s.200 -- presumptive element in S.210 of police case getting primacy and preference over complaint case,needs re-visit - remedy in shape of "complaint" under Chapters XV and XVI is available exclusively to victim -- concept of victim came to be statutorily recognized in CrPC since 31.12.2009 -- S.210 is part of CrPC since 1973 -- law makers,while engrafting S.210, had no occasion to take into account its repercussions qua "victims" -- this statutory avenue made available to victim/complainant cannot be allowed to be rendered infructuous at altar of S.210 -- specially in cases where police fails to conclude investigation within reasonable time. [Para 16.1]
(10) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 156 (3), 200 and 210 -- application u/s. 156 (3) and complaint u/s. 200 filed simultaneously -- police qua S.156 (3) CrPC application (alleging improper/delayed investigation simpliciter or along with non-registration of FIR) should not be granted more than 60/90 days or any longer period of time statutorily prescribed -- if police submits report within such time, Magistrate may either dismiss/dispose of S. 156 (3) application with/without directions by passing speaking order, or supervise and monitor investigating process -- in case police fails to submit report within such time, Magistrate shall proceed with complaint u/s. 200 notwithstanding bar in S. 210 -- as and when police report u/s. 173 is filed (even after 60/90 days or any longer period of time statutorily prescribed) and cognizance of offence in police report is taken, Magistrate shall club complaint case with charge-sheet (final report) filed by police and proceed to adjudicate both cases together, treating them to have arisen from police report. 2001 (1) JLJ 395 (SC), (2008) 2 SCC 409 and (2016) 6 SCC 277 followed. [Para 20]
¼1½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ rFkk 200 & 'kfDr dh O;kfIr rFkk çÑfr & eftLVªsV esa lhfer Òwfedk fufgr gS] t¨ i;Zos{k.k çÑfr dh gS & mu volj¨a ij ferO;;rk ls ç;qDr dh tkuk g¨rh gS tc iqfyl ;k r¨ çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ jftLVªhÑr ugha djrh] ;k fQj vuqfpr jhfr esa vUos"k.k djrh gSA ¼iSjk 8 ,oa 8-1½
¼2½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & vè;k; 12 & eftLVªsV dh i;Zos{k.k & 'kfDr & mn~ns'; & lqfuf'pr djuk fd laKs; vijkèk fd, tkus d¢ ckjs esa fdlh Òh lzksr ls çkIr tkudkjh vuUosf"kr ugha jgs & laKs; vijkèk bruk xaÒhj g¨rk gS fd ihfM+r gh ugha vfirq O;kid lekt Òh çfrdwyr% çÒkfor g¨rk gS & iqfyl d¢ ekè;e ls ;g lqfuf'pr djuk jkT; dk lkoZÒ©e ÑR; gS fd tc Òh v©j tgk¡ Òh fd;k x;k d¨Ã Òh laKs; vijkèk iqfyl }kjk vjftLVªhÑr rFkk vuUosf"kr] l{ke U;k;ky; }kjk vfopkfjr rFkk] lkfcr ik, tkus ij] vnafMr ugha jgsA ¼iSjk 9½
¼3½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ & 'kfDr dh O;kfIr & tgk¡ Òh iqfyl }kjk laKs; vijkèk jftLVªhÑr ugha fd;k x;k g¨ ogk¡ mldk jftLVªhdj.k funsf'kr djuk gh ugha] vfirq ;g lqfuf'pr djuk Òh eftLVªsV d¢ fy, vfuok;Z gS fd iqfyl }kjk fd;k tkus okyk vUos"k.k] lR; ij igqapus d¢ ,dek= mn~ns'; ls fd;k x;k fu"i{k & 'khÄzxkeh v©j fdlh d¢ Òh çfr nqjkxzg d¢ rRo ls eqDr gSA ¼iSjk 9-1½
¼4½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ & eftLVªsV lacafèkr iqfyl Fkkus ls çfrosnu eaxkrk gS & vko';d rkRi;Z gS fd ;fn èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu dh varoZLrq ls çdV g¨rk gS fd laKs; vijkèk fd;k x;k gS rFkk vc rd ,slk d¨Ã vijkèk jftLVªhÑr ugha fd;k x;k gS r¨ iqfyl vijkèk jftLVªhÑr djus v©j rRi'pkr~ çfrosnu çLrqr djus d¢ fy, ckè; gSA ¼2014½ 2 ,l lh lh 1 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 11 ,oa 11-2½
¼5½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ & vfÒO;fDr ^^ldrk gS^^ & vUos"k.k dk funs'k nsus ;k fQj ,slk djus ls bUdkj djus dh oSosfdd & 'kfDr eftLVªsV esa fufgr djus dk foèkku eaMy dk vk'k; çdV djrh gSA ¼iSjk 11-1½
¼6½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ & Òkjr dk lafoèkku & vuqPNsn 14 & çfrosnu Qkby djus d¢ fy, iqfyl }kjk vusd volj ÃfIlr v©j og çnku fd, x, & foyac v©j vfuf'prrk dkfjr g¨rh gS & fofèklEer & 'kklu esa foyac v©j vfuf'prrk ljkguh; ugha & blls varr% jkT; v©j mld¢ ÑR;dkfj;¨a d¢ dk;Zdyki¨a esa euekuh vk tkrh gS & çR;{kr% vuqPNsn 14 dk mYyaÄu g¨rk gSA ¼2006½ 8 ,l lh lh 1 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 14½
¼7½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ rFkk 200 & èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu vyx ls ;k èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn d¢ lkFk Qkby & ,slh ifjfLFkfr esa eftLVªsV dh dkuwuh ckè;rk & ekxZn'kZd fl)kar vfèkdfFkrA ¼2015½ 6 ,l lh lh 287 rFkk ¼2013½ 6 ,l lh lh 384 vuqlfjrA 2008 lhvkj ,y ts 472 ¼bykŒ½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 15-4½
¼8½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½ rFkk 200 & èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu rFkk èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn ,d gh le; Qkby & çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ nkf[ky fd, tkus d¢ i'pkr~ vuqfpr v©j@vFkok foyafcr vUos"k.k dh f'kdk;r & eftLVªsV d¨ çfrosnu çLrqr djus d¢ fy, iqfyl d¨ funsf'kr djuk pkfg, & rRi'pkr~ ;fn çfrosnu ls vuqfpr ;k foyafcr vUos"k.k çdV g¨rk g¨ r¨ leqfpr mipkjkRed funs'k ikfjr djuk pkfg, & ,slk vkns'k ikfjr djus d¢ mijkar eftLVªsV ;g lqfuf'pr djus d¢ fy, fd og rdZlaxr v©j fofèkiw.kZ fu"d"kZ ij igq¡ps] vUos"k.k dh çfØ;k ekWfuVfjax Òh dj ldrk gS & rFkkfi] vUos"k.k çkfèkdkjh dh ftEesnkjh vius Åij ysus ls cpuk pkfg, & i;Zos{k.k Òwfedk gh èkkj.k djuk pkfg, & iqfyl ls eaxk, x, çfrosnu ls ;g çdV g¨us dh n'kk esa vUos"k.k rRijrk ls v©j fofèk d¢ vuqlkj fd;k tk jgk gS] vk[;kid vkns'k ikfjr dj èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu [kkfjt fd;k tkuk pkfg,A ¼iSjk 15-4&ch½
¼9½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½] 200 rFkk 210 & èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu rFkk èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn ,d gh le; Qkby & vuqfpr v©j@vFkok foyafcr vUos"k.k dh f'kdk;r & tc Òh iqfyl ls çfrosnu eaxk;k tkrk gS r¨ mièkkj.kk dh tkrh gS fd çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ nkf[ky dh tk pqdh gS rFkk vUos"k.k dh çfØ;k yafcr gS & èkkjk 210¼1½ esa varfoZ"V otZu çÒkoh g¨ tkrk gS & ;fn èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn d¢ vuqlj.k esa tk¡p@fopkj.k vkjaÒ fd;k x;k g¨ r¨ eftLVªsV mls j¨dus d¢ fy, foo'k & ifjokn ekeys ij iqfyl ekeys d¨ çkFkfedrk v©j vfèkeku fn, tkus d¢ èkkjk 210 d¢ mièkkj.kkRed rRo ij iqufoZpkj vko';d & vè;k; 15 v©j 16 d¢ vèkhu ^^ifjokn^^ d¢ :i esa mipkj vuU; :i ls ihfM+r d¨ miyCèk & naM çfØ;k lafgrk esa ihfM+r dh ladYiuk d¨ dkuwuh ekU;rk 31-12-2009 ls nh xà & èkkjk 210 lu~ 1973 ls naM çfØ;k lafgrk dk Òkx & èkkjk 210 Mkyrs le; fofèkfuekZrkv¨a d¨ ^^ihfM+r¨a^^ d¢ lanÒZ esa mld¢ çfrçÒko ij fopkj djus dk volj çkIr ugha Fkk & ihfM+r@ifjoknh d¨ miyCèk djk, x, bl dkuwuh ekxZ d¨ èkkjk 210 dh osfn ij cfy p<+k dj fu"Qy djus ugha fn;k tk ldrk & fo'ks"kr% mu ekey¨a esa tgk¡ iqfyl ;qfDr;qDr le; d¢ Òhrj vUos"k.k iw.kZ djus esa vlgy jgrh gSA ¼iSjk 16-1½
¼10½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 156¼3½] 200 rFkk 210 & èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu rFkk èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn ,d gh le; Qkby & naM çfØ;k lafgrk dh èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu ¼d¢oy vuqfpr@foyafcr vUos"k.k d¢ vFkok çFke bfÙkyk fji¨VZ d¢ vjftLVªhdj.k d¢ vfÒdFku lfgr½ d¢ lanÒZ esa iqfyl d¨ 60@90 fnol vFkok dkuwuh :i ls fofgr fdlh c`gÙkj le;kofèk ls vfèkd le; ugha fn;k tkuk pkfg, & iqfyl ,slh le;kofèk esa çfrosnu çLrqr djrh gS r¨ eftLVªsV èkkjk 156¼3½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu ;k r¨ vk[;kid vkns'k ikfjr dj funs'k¨a lfgr@fcuk [kkfjt dj ldrk gS@fuiVk ldrk gS vFkok vUos"k.k çfØ;k dk i;Zos{k.k v©j ekWfuVfjax dj ldrk gS & ,slh le;kofèk d¢ Òhrj çfrosnu çLrqr djus esa iqfyl d¢ vlQy jgus ij eftLVªsV] èkkjk 210 d¢ otZu d¢ g¨rs gq, Òh] èkkjk 200 d¢ vèkhu ifjokn esa dk;Zokgh djsxk & tc Òh iqfyl }kjk èkkjk 173 d¢ vèkhu çfrosnu ¼60@90 fnol vFkok dkuwuh :i ls fofgr fdlh c`gÙkj vofèk d¢ mijkar Òh½ Qkby fd;k tkrk gS rFkk iqfyl çfrosnu esa vijkèk dk laKku fd;k tkrk gS] rc eftLVªsV ifjokn ekeys d¨ iqfyl }kjk Qkby fd, x, vkj¨ii= ¼vafre çfrosnu½ d¢ lkFk lgc) djsxk rFkk n¨u¨a ekey¨a d¨ iqfyl çfrosnu ls mn~Òwr ekurs gq, n¨u¨a ekey¨a dk U;k;fu.kZ;u dh dk;Zokgh ,d lkFk djsxkA 2001 ¼1½ ts ,y ts 395 ¼mPpre U;k;ky;½] ¼2008½ 2 ,l lh lh 409 rFkk ¼2016½ 6 ,l lh lh 277 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 20½
ORDER
1. Inherent powers of this Court u/S.482 CrPC are invoked praying for the following relief(s) :
“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that the criminal petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and directed to the respondents for protection of the property, and the life of the petitioner and also directed to respondents for registration of the cases of the petitioner and fair investigation in the supervision of the learned lower Court as per law. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may kindly deem fit and considers necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly also be granted.”
1.1 The question before this Court primarily relates to the extent and nature of power of a Magistrate u/S.156(3) CrPC while considering grievance either of non-registration of cognizable offence or improper/delayed investigation.
1.2 Other question is of nature and extent of jurisdiction available to Magistrate when an application u/S.156(3) CrPC is filed along with a complaint u/S.200 CrPC.
2. The present case reveals abject apathy and dereliction of duty on the part of Police in failing to register cognizable offence of theft in regard to which information was furnished as early as on 18.11.2019 (vide Annexure P-2) and despite the learned Magistrate passing order dated 23.12.2019 u/S.156(3) CrPC, calling for report from Police Station Picchore, District Gwalior (M.P.). Pertinently while doing so the Magistrate kept the complaint filed by petitioner u/S.200 CrPC in a state of suspended animation (unregistered).
3. The petitioner/complainant herein after unsuccessfully knocking the doors of the Police and as well as Superintendent of Police, Gwalior (M.P.) u/S.154(1) and 154(3) CrPC respectively, approached the learned Magistrate u/S.156(3) CrPC by filing application on 23.12.2019 which was subjected to various hearings i.e. 13.1.2020, 5.2.2020, 26.2.2020 and 16.3.2020. On each occasion the police sought and was granted time to submit report in regard to the contents of application u/S.156(3). Thereafter, the matter could not be listed on the next date i.e. 30.3.2020 due to lockdown owing to Covid-19 pandemic. The Magistrate thereafter took up the matter on 10.7.2020 to be again adjourned due to non-resumption of physical hearing in Courts. The proceedings u/S.156(3) in the case are now informed to have resumed, but to no avail since FIR has not yet been lodged by the police.
3.1 Pertinently, in this case, Sec.156(3) application and the omplaint u/S.200 CrPC were filed simultaneously by the complainant/petitioner alleging the same offence of theft (Sec.379 IPC). From the record, it appears that the said complaint u/S.200 CrPC remained unregistered or in a state of suspended animation.
4. The aforesaid act on the part of police authorities of failing to register the offence is in violation of the law laid down in the case of “Suresh Chand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another [200(1) JLJ 395 = AIR 2001 SC 571]” whereby it is held :
“10. The position is thus clear. Any judicial Magistrate, before, taking cognizance of the offence, can order investigation under section 156(3) of the Code. If he does so, he is not to examine the complainant on oath because he was not taking cognizance of any offence therein. For the purpose of enabling the police to start investigation it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR. There is nothing illegal in doing so. After all registration of an FIR involves only the process of entering the substance of the information relating to the commission of the cognizable offence in a book kept by the officer-in-charge of the police station as indicated in section 154 of the Code. Even if a Magistrate does not say in so many words while directing investigation under section 156(3) of the Code that an FIR should be registered, it is the duty of the officer-in-charge of the police station to register the FIR regarding the cognizable offence disclosed by the com
SupremeToday
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to determine whether to direct an investigation, particularly in civil disputes masquerading as criminal matters.
The court ruled that a Magistrate must exercise careful judicial discretion when considering an application under Section 156(3), ensuring each complaint is evaluated adequately before deciding on FI....
Direction for Police Investigation – Option to direct registration of case and its investigation by police should be exercised where some “investigation” is required, which is of a nature that is not....
The Magistrate must judiciously exercise discretion in registering FIRs under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., ensuring that mechanical refusals are avoided when cognizable offences are disclosed.
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 175(3) of the BNSS to decide whether to register an FIR based on the application, assessing whether a cognizable offense is made out.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
