(25.03.2021)

1.

Inherent powers of this Court u/S.482 Cr.P.C. are invoked

praying for the following relief(s):

“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that the criminal

petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and

directed to the respondents for protection of the property, and

the life of the petitioner and also directed to respondents for

registration of the cases of the petitioner and fair

investigation in the supervision of the learned lower court as

per law. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may

kindly deem fit and considers necessary in the facts and

circumstances of the case may kindly also be granted.”

1.1

The question before this Court primarily relates to the extent and

nature of power of a Magistrate u/S.156(3) Cr.P.C. while considering

grievance either of non-registration of cognizable offence or

improper/delayed investigation.

1.2

Other question is of nature and extent of jurisdiction available to

Magistrate when an application u/S.156(3) Cr.P.C. is filed along with a

complaint u/S.200 Cr.P.C.

2.

The present case reveals abject apathy and dereliction of duty on

the part of Police in failing to register cognizable offence of theft in

regard to which information was furnished as early as on 18.11.2019

(vide Annexure P-2) and despite the learned Magistrate passing order

dated 23.12.2019 u/S.156(3) Cr.P.C., calling for report from Police

Station Picchore, District Gwalior (M.P.). Pertinently while doing so

the Magistrate kept the complaint filed by petitioner u/S.200 Cr.P.C. in

a state of suspended animation (unregistered).

3.

The petitioner/complainant herein after unsuccessfully knocking

3 MCRC.44485.2020

the doors of the Police and as well as Superintendent of Police, Gwalior

(M.P.) u/S.154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. respectively, approached the

learned Magistrate u/S.156(3) Cr.P.C. by filing application on

23.12.2019 which was subjected to various hearings i.e. 13.01.2020,

05.02.2020, 26.02.2020 and 16.03.2020. On each occasion the police

sought and was granted time to submit report in regard to the contents

of application u/S.156(3). Thereafter, the matter could not be listed on

the next date i.e. 30.03.2020 due to lockdown owing to Covid-19

pandemic. The Magistrate thereafter took up the matter on 10.07.2020

to be again adjourned due to non-resumption of physical hearing in

courts. The proceedings u/S.156(3) in the case are now informed to

have resumed, but to no avail since FIR has not yet been lodged by the

police.

3.1

Pertinently, in this case, Sec.156(3) application and the complaint

u/S.200 Cr.P.C. were filed simultaneously by the complainant/petitioner

alleging the same offence of theft (Sec.379 IPC). From the record, it

appears that the said complaint u/S.200 Cr.P.C. remained unregistered

or in a state of suspended animation.

4.

The aforesaid act on the part of police authorities of failing to

register the offence is in violation of the law laid down in the case of

“Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another

[AIR 2001 SC 571]” whereby it is held:

“10. The position is thus clear. Any judicial Magistrate,

before, taking cognizance of the offence, can order

investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code. If he does so,

he is not to examine the complainant on oath because he was

4 MCRC.44485.2020

not taking cognizance of any offence therein. For the purpose

of enabling the police to start investigation it is open to the

Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR. There is

nothing illegal in doing so. After all registration of an FIR

involves only the process of entering the substance of the

information relating to the commission of the cognizable

offence in a book kept by the officer-in-charge of the police

station as indicated in Section 154 of the Code. Even if a

Magistrate does not say in so