A Magistrate retains the authority to direct an investigation under Section 156(3) before taking cognizance of a complaint, ensuring procedural integrity in criminal proceedings.

1. The petitioners have filed this petition under S.482 of Cr.P.C., assailing the order dated 24-4-2015 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Revision No.13 of 2015 whereby the Revisional Court allowed the revision filed by respondent No.1 Nilesh Patel against the order dated 21-1-2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon whereby the application filed by respondent No.1 under S.156(3) of Cr.P.C., has been dismissed. The revisional court has allowed the revision and remanded the matter to trial court for deciding the application filed by respondent No.1 under S.156(3) of Cr.P.C., in accordance with law.

2. The brief facts as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners are real brothers. The family of the petitioners are engaged in the business of coal transport since long. The petitioners have purchased a plot situated behind the plot bearing current Khasra No. 4/5 for the storage of coal. The only way to that plot was though Khasra No. 4/5 which belongs to the father of respondent No.1, late Harihar Bhai Patel. The plot bearing present Khasra No. 4/5 has been continued to be in possession and used by the petitioners. The truck and other articles were kept there and to keep a watch over the same a room was built for accommodating the Chowkidar. The land was surrounded with boundary wall with a gate in front to which Harihar Bhai Patel, who is father of respondent No.1, never objected nor he instituted any proceedings against the petitioners.

3. Learned Sr. Advocate for the petitioners would submit that the disputed land bearing Khasra No. 4/5 has been continued to be in possession and used by the petitioners and other articles were kept there and to keep a watch over the same a room was built for accommodating the Chowkidar. Harihar Bhai Patel who is father of respondent No.1 never objected nor did he institute any proceedings against the petitioners for possession of the said plot. He would further submit that the factum of possession of the petitioners over the said plot was admitted by the father of respondent No.1 on 12-10-1984 and he died in September, 2012. The respondent No.1, who claims to have acquired American citizenship, came to India a few days before death of his father, leaving behind his family in USA tried to usurp the possession of the plot forcibly but having failed to do so he submitted a false complaint on 16-10-2012 that the petitioners have trespassed over the land and, therefore, he wanted to restore his possession by ousting the petitioners. The police made inquiries and having found that the complaint is not true, they did not take any action, thereafter, respondent No.1 filed another complaint on 3-3-2013 before the Incharge of Police Station, Rajnandgaon and again using his political influence he made a false complaint to the Chief Minister of the State and got it forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon to inquire into the matter vide letter dated 4-3 - 2013. Under the political pressure by respondent No.1, Incharge, Police Station Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, filed Istegasa under S.145 of Cr.P.C., arraying the respondent No.1 as party No.1 and the petitioner No.1 as party No.2 on 7-1-2014 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajnandgaon. The preliminary order was passed and thereafter both parties have filed their respective claims and documents in support of their documents. It has been further contented that the Sub Divisional Magistrate found that no order of restoring o