The 2nd respondent lodged the first information report

with the jurisdictional police alleging that the petitioners came to

the property belonging to the informant and troubled the tenants

and also removed the board and assaulted him with their hands

and also threatened the informant with dire consequence. The

jurisdictional police taking into account that the offences alleged

against the petitioners are non-cognizable made a requisition to

the jurisdictional Magistrate so as to investigate the offences

alleged against the petitioners. The jurisdictional Magistrate

endorsed on the requisition permitting the jurisdictional police to

investigate for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 426,

504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC. Being aggrieved, the

petitioners are before this Court.

2.

Sri C V Nagesh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for

the learned petitioners' counsel would submit that Section

155(1) of Cr.PC specifies that an officer in-charge of the police

station shall refer the informant to the Magistrate in case of non-

cognizable offence. In the instant case, the officer incharge of

4

the police station without authority of law has personally

approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to permit him to

investigate into the matter and as such, the same is one without

authority of law. In support, he placed a reliance on the decision

of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P No.3082/2007 (Dd

22.10.2008). He further submits that the jurisdictional

Magistrate without applying his mind registered the case against

the petitioners for the offences alleged. Hence, he submits that

the impugned order passed by the jurisdictional Magistrate

permitting the jurisdictional police to investigate into the matter

requires to be quashed.

3.

On the other hand, learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the State would submit that the officer

incharge of the police station is entitled to make representation

to the Magistrate for permission to investigate into the

cognizable offences punishable under Sections 323, 426, 504,

506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

4.

I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the parties.

5

5.

The issue involved in this petition is, whether the

officer incharge of the police station can personally approach the

jurisdictional Magistrate to permit him to investigate into the

offences, which are non-cognizable.

6.

The issue involved in this petition is no longer

res-integra in view of the decision of co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in Crl.P No.3082/2007, wherein at paras-6 to 8 it is held

as follows:

"6. A plain reading of sub-Section (1) of Section 155

Cr.P.C makes it abundantly clear that the information

over commission of non-cognizable offence to the

jurisdictional Police Station, requires the officer to enter

or cause to be entered the substance of the information

in a book to be kept by such officer, in such form as the

State Government may prescribe, in that behalf, and

refer the informant to the Magistrate. In other words, if

the information did not disclose the commission of a

cognizable offence, the Police Officer having no power to

investigate into the matter, is duty bound to refer the

informant to approach the Magistrate, in the matter of

permission

to investigate into

the

non-cognizable

offence. It is for the informant to seek the orders of

Magistrate. In any event, sub-Section (1) of Section 155

Cr.P.C does not empower the Police Officer to make a

request to the Magistrate to permit investigation into a

non-cognizable offence.

7. If the informant desires to seek a direction to the

police officer to investigate into the non-cognizable

6

offence, at the hands of the Magistrate, has to lodge a

complaint

under

Section

200

Cr.P.C.,

when

the

Magistrate would apply his mind to the averments in the

complaint and on being satisfied that there are reasons

to believe that a non-cognizable offence is committed

may direct investigation by the jurisdictional Pol