order

380] , had to express thus : (SCC p. 258, para 17)

“17. … It may be noted further that an order made under sub-section (3) of Section 156, is in the nature of a peremptory reminder or intimation to the police to exercise their plenary powers of investigation under Section 156(1). Such an investigation embraces the entire continuous process which begins with the collection of evidence under Section 156 and ends with a report or charge-sheet under Section173.”

22. In Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa [ (2013) 10 SCC 705 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 35] , the two-Judge Bench had to say this : (SCC p. 711, para 11)

“11. The scope of Section 156(3) CrPC came up for consideration before this Court in several cases. This Court in Maksud Saiyed [Maksud Saiyed v. State of Gujarat , (2008) 5 SCC 668 :

(2008) SCC (Cri) 692] examined the requirement of the application of mind by the Magistrate before exercising jurisdiction under Section 156(3) and held that where jurisdiction is exercised on a complaint filed in terms of Section 156(3) or Section 200 CrPC, the Magistrate is required to apply his mind, in such a case, the Special Judge/Magistrate cannot refer the matter under Section 156(3) against a publi