Magistrate not post office; must judicially assess before directing FIR in civil-disguised criminal complaints under BNSS Section 175(3).

PRAYER: This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 438 read with 442 of B.N.S.S. to call for the records related to the order dated 10.02.2026 passed in Crl.M.P,No. 205/2026 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambur and set aside the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent police to register the First Information Report on the petitioners complaint dated 11.12.2025.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. Thiyagarajan B For Respondent(s): Mr. R. Krishore Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) [for R1]

No appearance [for R2 to R5]

ORDER

This Criminal Revision petition has been filed as against the order dated

10.02.2026 passed in Crl.M.P,No. 205/2026 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambur.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that on perusal of the affidavit, there are cognizable offences. He would further submit that the learned Magistrate, instead of forwarding to register FIR, has dismissed the petition.

3. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the

1^st respondent would submit that the entire issues arising in respect of the dispute between the brothers and even according to the allegation made in the complaint, it was in respect of the request made by the respondents 2 to 4 to vacate the premises.

4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are cognizable offences as stated in the complaint, the Magistrate has no power except to forward the FIR, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically held that the Magistrate is not merely a post office to simply forward the complaint. As rightly observed by the learned Magistrate, there are ingredients for a civil nature and no one should be allowed to camouflage civil case by incorporating such criminal ingredients there of to convert into criminal case.

5. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Om Prakash Ambadkar vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors in Crl Appeal No.352 of 2020 reported in 2025 INSC

139, wherein, in Para Nos.25,30 and 31, it has been held as follows:-

“25. In fact, the Magistrate ought to direct investigation by the police only where the assistance of the Investigating Agency is necessary and the Court feels that the cause of justice is likely to suffer in the absence of investigation by the police. The Magistrate is not expected to mechanically direct investigation by the police without first examining whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, investigation by the State machinery is actually required or not. If the allegations made in the complaint are simple, where the Court can straight away proceed to conduct the trial, the Magistrate is expected to record evidence and proceed further in the matter, instead of passing the buck to the Police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Ofcourse, if the allegations made in the complaint require complex and complicated investigation which cannot be undertaken without active assistance and expertise of the State machinery, it would only be appropriate for the Magistrate to direct investigation by the police authorities. The Magistrate is, therefore, not supposed to act merely as a Post Office and needs to adopt a judicial approach while considering an application seeking investigation by the Police.

30.Sub-section (4) of Section 175 of the BNSS is a new addition to the scheme of investigation of cognizable cases when compared with the scheme previously existing in Section 156 of the Cr.P.C. It provides an additional safeguard to a public servant against whom an accusation of committing a cognizable offence arising in the course of discharge of his official duty is made. The provision stipulates that any Magistrate who is empowered t