Supreme Court Judgment on Filing Complaint Case Under Section 190 CrPC

Overview of Section 190 CrPC

• Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) empowers a Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence based on:
• A complaint of facts constituting an offence (Section 190(1)(a)).
• A police report (Section 190(1)(b)).
• Information received from any person (Section 190(1)(c)).

Key Legal Principles

1. Cognizance on Complaint:

2. The Magistrate must apply his mind to the allegations in the complaint to determine if they disclose a prima facie case for proceeding further. If the complaint does not disclose an offence, it should be dismissed under Section 203 CrPC Amar Singh VS S. R. Rana - Himachal Pradesh (2021)Braj Lal VS State of U. P. - Allahabad (2021).

3. Discretion of the Magistrate:

4. The Magistrate has the discretion to treat an application under Section 156(3) CrPC as a complaint case under Section 190. This means that even if a complaint is filed, the Magistrate can choose to direct an investigation instead of taking cognizance immediately Gyan Prakash Upadhyay VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2019)Anil Sood VS State - Delhi (2014).

5. Pre-Cognizance Stage:

6. An order under Section 156(3) is considered a pre-cognizance stage. The Magistrate can order an investigation before formally taking cognizance of the offence PHOOL SINGH VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad (1984)Chinna Kaliappa Gounden VS Emperor - Madras (1905).

7. Judicial Review:

8. The High Court has the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash a complaint or recall an order if it finds the complaint to be frivolous or lacking sufficient grounds KAILASH CHAUDHARI VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Allahabad (1993).

Relevant Case Law

• Mehmood Ul Rehman v. Khazir Mohammad Tunda & Ors.: The Supreme Court emphasized that taking cognizance is not a mechanical process and requires the Magistrate to apply his mind to the facts presented Amar Singh VS S. R. Rana - Himachal Pradesh (2021).
• H.S. Bains v. The State: The Court held that a Magistrate can take cognizance based on a police report and is not bound by the conclusions of the police Brajbhushan Yadav S/o Ghanshyam Yadav VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh (2021).
• Gangadhar Janardan Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra: The Court reiterated that if the police do not act on a cognizable offence, the complainant can approach the Magistrate under Section 190 STATE OF GUJARAT VS AFROZ MOHAMMED HASANFATTA - Supreme Court (2019).

Conclusion

• The Supreme Court has established that a Magistrate has the authority to take cognizance of offences based on complaints under Section 190 CrPC, provided he applies his mind to the allegations. The discretion to treat an application under Section 156(3) as a complaint case allows for flexibility in addressing grievances when police inaction occurs. Judicial review is available to ensure that the process is not misused.

Recommendations

• Ensure that any complaint filed clearly discloses an offence to avoid dismissal under Section 203.
• Consider the option of filing a complaint under Section 190 if police inaction is encountered.
• Be prepared to challenge any mechanical orders issued by the Magistrate that do not reflect a proper application of judicial mind.

References: Amar Singh VS S. R. Rana - Himachal Pradesh (2021)Braj Lal VS State of U. P. - Allahabad (2021)Gyan Prakash Upadhyay VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2019)Anil Sood VS State - Delhi (2014)STATE OF GUJARAT VS AFROZ MOHAMMED HASANFATTA - Supreme Court (2019)Brajbhushan Yadav S/o Ghanshyam Yadav VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh (2021)KAILASH CHAUDHARI VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Allahabad (1993)PHOOL SINGH VS STATE OF U. P. - Allahabad (1984)Chinna Kaliappa Gounden VS Emperor - Madras (1905).].