A Magistrate can order investigation under Section 156(3) without requiring verification from the complainant at the time of cognizance.

JUDGEMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 244 of 2012 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH =========================================

1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No

3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? No

4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? No

5. Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? No ========================================= CHAITNIYA ASHOKKUMAR BARDOLIWALA ­ DIRECTOR OF SSCIDAGOLD & 2 ­ Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 ­ Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance : MR VIMAL A PUROHIT for Applicant(s) : 1 ­ 3.

MR LB DABHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 ­ 4.

========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 18/09/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT [1.0]

Present Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”) has been preferred by the applicants herein – original complainant to quash and set aside the 2/5 JUDGMENT impugned judgment and order dated 19.01.2012 passed by the learned trial Court – learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1240 of 2011 by which the learned trial Court has dismissed the said complaint under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “CrPC”) solely on the ground that the applicant – original complainant is not ready to verify the complaint on oath and/or is ready to give the verification as required under Section 200 of the CrPC.

[2.0]

Shri Vimal Purohit, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Yousuf vs. Afaq Jahan reported in AIR 2006 SC 705 more particularly para 11 of the said judgment and has submitted that as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, any Judicial Magistrate before taking cognizance of the offence, can order investigation under Section 156(3) of the CrPC and if the learned Magistrate does so, he has not to examine the complainant. It is submitted that as in the complaint, the applicant – original complainant prayed for the investigation under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, under the bonafide belief, the applicant – complainant did not give the verification, however, he was always ready and willing to follow the procedure as required under Section 200 of the CrPC and give the verification and examine himself. It is stated at the Bar that if the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned trial Court in that case applicant shall appear before the learned trial Court for examining himself of oath and for verification as 3/5 JUDGMENT required under Section 200 of the CrPC.

[3.0]

Shri Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has requested to pass appropriate order considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

[4.0]

Heard Shri Purohit, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant – original complainant and Shri Dabhi, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and considered the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court dismissing the complaint. It appears from the impugn