Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Prior Application Requirement - A petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. must be preceded by applications under Sections 154(1) and 154(3). Both must be explicitly mentioned in the application, and relevant documents should be filed to substantiate this. ["Mandeep Singh VS State of Punjab - Punjab and Haryana"] ["R. P. Diwan S/o Late Ram Singh Diwan VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"] ["Sau. Ranjana VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay"] ["Sarita Sharma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]
Procedure and Judicial Discretion - When a Magistrate exercises powers under Section 156(3), he must apply judicial mind, verifying the allegations before directing police investigation. Once cognizance is taken and the procedure in Chapter XV is initiated, reverting to the pre-cognizance stage or using Section 156(3) again is not permissible. ["Mandeep Singh VS State of Punjab - Punjab and Haryana"] ["Kailash Vijayvargiya VS Rajlakshmi Chaudhuri - Supreme Court"] ["D.Vijitha vs The Inspector of Police - Madras"] ["G. Siva Ramudu, S/o. G. Thippaiah VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"] ["Shaukat Ali S/o. Sh. Masiyat Ali VS Rehana Parveen D/o. Sh. Masiyat Ali W/o. Arshad Ali - Himachal Pradesh"]
Investigation and Complaint Distinction - An order under Section 156(3) is a directive to police to investigate, not a complaint. The Magistrate may also choose to proceed via Sections 200 or 202, or order police investigation under Section 156(3). Filing an affidavit is not statutory but can be encouraged to ensure responsibility. ["R. P. Diwan S/o Late Ram Singh Diwan VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"] ["Sarita Sharma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"] ["Prem Narayan Mishra VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. - Allahabad"] ["Anaz M.A. S/o A.M. Abdulbari vs State of Kerala - Kerala"] ["Maiku Lal v. State of U. P. - Allahabad"]
Requisites for Filing under Section 156(3) - The application should clearly state prior attempts under Sections 154(1) and 154(3). If these are not demonstrated, the application may be contested. Proper verification ensures the Magistrate's exercise of jurisdiction is valid. ["Pooja @ Gurinder Kaur Kainth VS State of Punjab - Punjab and Haryana"] ["Sarita Sharma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"] ["Sau. Ranjana VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay"] ["Harshikaben Shantilal Patel VS State of Gujarat - Gujarat"]
Special Cases and Limitations - In cases involving sensitive offences like sexual harassment or POCSO, police are generally obliged to register an FIR once a cognizable offence is disclosed, even if the application is under Section 156(3). Sanctions may be required for prosecution of public servants under certain laws, and improper use of Section 156(3) to settle scores or pressurize parties is discouraged. ["Mohd. Aarif Alias Aarif VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad"] ["Mukesh Kharwar VS State of U. P. - Crimes"] ["G. Prabakaran VS Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur - Madras"] ["03600073442"]
Finality of Cognizance - Once a Magistrate takes cognizance and proceeds under Chapter XV, reverting to the initial stage or choosing alternative procedures like Section 202 is not permissible. The exercise of jurisdiction under Section 156(3) is subject to application of judicial discretion and proper procedural steps. ["G. Siva Ramudu, S/o. G. Thippaiah VS State Of Andhra Pradesh - Andhra Pradesh"] ["Atul Ashok Mundada VS State of Maharashtra - Bombay"] ["Shaukat Ali S/o. Sh. Masiyat Ali VS Rehana Parveen D/o. Sh. Masiyat Ali W/o. Arshad Ali - Himachal Pradesh"]
Analysis and Conclusion:Filing a procedure under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. requires prior applications under Sections 154(1) and 154(3), with clear documentation, and the Magistrate must exercise judicial discretion carefully. Once cognizance is taken and investigation initiated under Chapter XV, the Magistrate cannot revert to earlier procedural stages or reapply Section 156(3). Proper verification, adherence to procedural safeguards, and avoidance of misuse are essential to uphold the integrity of the process. The procedure is designed to facilitate police investigation based on judicial directions, not as a substitute for filing complaints, especially in sensitive cases. ["Mandeep Singh VS State of Punjab - Punjab and Haryana"] ["R. P. Diwan S/o Late Ram Singh Diwan VS State of Chhattisgarh - Chhattisgarh"] ["Sarita Sharma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]
Facing police inaction on a cognizable offence? Many individuals wonder about the procedure of 156(3) to filing an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). This provision empowers a Magistrate to direct police investigation when the FIR isn't registered, but it's not a shortcut—strict procedural safeguards exist to prevent misuse. Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022)
In this guide, we'll break down the process, requirements, and judicial insights. Whether you're a victim seeking justice or navigating legal hurdles, understanding this ensures compliance and effectiveness. Note: This is general information; consult a lawyer for specific advice.
Section 156(3) allows any person to approach a Magistrate for an order directing the police to investigate a cognizable offence and submit a report. It's typically used at the pre-cognizance stage, before the Magistrate takes formal notice of the offence. This distinguishes it from filing a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC. MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477Salim Sikander Ekka S/o Shri Victor Ekka VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2024 Supreme(Chh) 261
The power must be exercised judiciously. As held, the Magistrate must exercise his judicial discretion after applying his mind to the facts and allegations, and not act mechanically. Srinivas Gundluri VS SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation - 2010 6 Supreme 33
First, submit a written complaint to the Station House Officer (SHO) for registering an FIR in cognizable cases. Police must register without preliminary inquiry. If refused, obtain a stamped refusal copy. Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022)Subhash Chandra VS State Of U. P. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2
Courts emphasize: prior to filing a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., there have to be applications Sections 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. Pooja @ Gurinder Kaur Kainth VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 292
If the SHO refuses, approach the Superintendent of Police (SP) with an affidavit-supported application mentioning the prior refusal. The SP can order investigation or FIR registration. Document this step meticulously. Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022)Subhash Chandra VS State Of U. P. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2Ashwin Thakkar VS State of Telangana - 2022 Supreme(Telangana) 192
For filing an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, both these aspects must be spelt out in the application and documentary proof of this must also be filed. M. Hanumantha Rao VS State of A. P. - 2019 Supreme(AP) 137
Only after exhausting above steps, file a written application to the Magistrate, supported by a sworn affidavit detailing facts, allegations, and prior attempts. Attach proofs like refusal copies. MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022)
The Supreme Court mandates: The application under Section 156(3) must be supported by an affidavit sworn by the applicant. MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477
In one case, failure to attach affidavit led to scrutiny: Even supporting affidavit was required to be submitted. Gurmail Singh VS State of Punjab - 2022 Supreme(P&H) 19
The Magistrate cannot issue mechanical orders. Must:
The Judicial Magistrate to pass a reasoned order before directing the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. Salim Sikander Ekka S/o Shri Victor Ekka VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2024 Supreme(Chh) 261
Orders are interlocutory, rarely appealable, urging caution. Om Prakash Ambadkar VS State of Maharashtra - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 260Priti Agarwalla VS State of GNCT of Delhi - 2024 5 Supreme 76
In rare cases of blatant police inaction, direct approach to Magistrate may suffice, but document everything. MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477 Courts warn against bypassing: remedy lies under sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, under section 156(3) Dilip Kumar Puri VS State of Madhya Pradesh - 2023 Supreme(MP) 26
Misuse leads to quashing:
In a rape case quashing, allegations were vague—no year, month and dates. Jasmit Singh VS State of J&K - 2021 Supreme(J&K) 414
High Courts stress: Approach with clean hands. Pooja @ Gurinder Kaur Kainth VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 292
Magistrates: Verify before directing; prevent abuse. Srinivas Gundluri VS SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation - 2010 6 Supreme 33
Section 156(3) CrPC is a vital tool for justice but demands procedural rigor. By following prior FIR steps, affidavit support, and judicial scrutiny, applicants aid fair investigations. Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022)
Key Takeaways:- Prior applications under 154(1)/(3) generally mandatory. Subhash Chandra VS State Of U. P. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2- Affidavit essential for accountability. MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477- Magistrate's reasoned order crucial. Srinivas Gundluri VS SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation - 2010 6 Supreme 33- Avoid misuse to prevent quashing. Om Prakash Ambadkar VS State of Maharashtra - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 260
This process upholds rule of law while curbing frivolous probes. For personalized guidance, consult a legal professional. Stay informed, act diligently.
References:- MADHAO VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - 2013 4 Supreme 477, Ram Pratap Singh VS State Of U. P. - Allahabad (2022), Subhash Chandra VS State Of U. P. - 2000 0 Supreme(SC) 2, Srinivas Gundluri VS SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation - 2010 6 Supreme 33, Om Prakash Ambadkar VS State of Maharashtra - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 260, Priti Agarwalla VS State of GNCT of Delhi - 2024 5 Supreme 76, Pooja @ Gurinder Kaur Kainth VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 292, Dilip Kumar Puri VS State of Madhya Pradesh - 2023 Supreme(MP) 26, Salim Sikander Ekka S/o Shri Victor Ekka VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2024 Supreme(Chh) 261, Ashwin Thakkar VS State of Telangana - 2022 Supreme(Telangana) 192, Gurmail Singh VS State of Punjab - 2022 Supreme(P&H) 19, Jasmit Singh VS State of J&K - 2021 Supreme(J&K) 414, Mohd. Altaf Shah VS Gh. Qadir Langoo - 2020 Supreme(J&K) 684, M. Hanumantha Rao VS State of A. P. - 2019 Supreme(AP) 137
#CrPC1563, #FIRProcedure, #LegalGuide
We have already indicated that there has to be prior applications under Section 154(1) and 154(3) while filing a petition under Section 156(3). Both the aspects should be clearly spelt out in the application and necessary documents to that effect shall be filed. ... But if he once takes such cognizance and embarks upon the procedure embodied in Chapter XV, he is not competent to switch back to the pre-cognizance stage and avail of section 156(3). ... State (Govt. of N....
In Para 31, it was observed that before filing an application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. there should be a prior application made under Section 154(1) and 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. ... (ii) Power under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. warrants application of judicial mind. (iii) There has to be prior applications under Section 154(1) and 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. while filing a petition under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.....
(3) or whether he can take cognizance and follow the procedure under section 202. ... under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. ... It is submitted that the learned CJM however did not dismiss the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. solely on the ground of delay, but examined her conduct since the date of the alleged rape till the filing of Section 156(3) application and found that her conduct contradicted her explanation for ... When a Mag....
Left with no alternative, the petitioner approached the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, by filing a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., 1973, seeking a direction to the police to register an FIR and investigate the cognizable offences disclosed in her complaint. ... Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., 1973, empowers a Magistrate to direct investigation by the police after applying judicial mind. Such a direction is not an empty formality. ... The police failed to comply with the judicial direction....
It is only thereafter, can he approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. A further remedy is also envisaged in the Code by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. ... It has been categorically held that the Magistrate would be well advised to verify the truth and veracity of the allegations and prior to filing a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. there have to be applications Sections 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. ... were attached thereto, on the....
It is only thereafter, can he approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. A further remedy is also envisaged in the Code by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. ... It has been categorically held that the Magistrate would be well advised to verify the truth and veracity of the allegations and prior to filing a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., there have to be applications Sections 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. ... attached thereto, on the oth....
For this grievance, the remedy lies under sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under section ... In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any merit in the contention of the counsel for the applicants that the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was not main....
The reasons, thus, disclose the journey of a case from filing of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to passing of a direction, a judgment or order. 26. ... (3) or whether he can take cognizance and follow the procedure under section 202. ... Chapter XV CrPC by filing complaint under Section 200 CrPC. ... When a Magistrate orders investigation under Section 156(3), he does so before cognizance of the offence. If he takes cognizance, he needs ....
with the rules of procedure. ... This court has further held that, prior to the filing of a petition under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., there have to be applications under Sec. 154(1) and 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. ... under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. ... The State of Maharashtra & Anr. reported in 2017 ALL MR (Cri) 4457 following Priyanka Srivastava (supra) has underlined the importance of filing of an affidavit separately as a support to the application made un....
In said case, the Hon’ble Court issued a caution to Magisterial Courts that while exercising powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the Magistrate should ensure that the applicant has not taken undue advantage in a criminal court to settle scores while filing application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. ... We have already indicated that there has to be prior applications under Section 154(1) and 154(3) while filing a petition under Section 156(3....
If the present case is viewed against the back drop of this case law, this Court has come to a conclusion that the judgment in Priyanka Srivastava's (2015) 6 SCC 287 (supra) case will have to hold the field. Apart from this, in para 31 of Priyanka Srivastava's case (2015) 6 SCC 287 (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has clearly held that there has to be a prior application under Section 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. For filing an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, both these aspects must be spelt out in the application and documentary proof of this must also be filed.#HL....
Even supporting affidavit was required to be submitted. The copy of the said judgment was circulated to all the High Courts for further circulation to the Sessions Judges and to the Magistrates. Perusal of the above judgment would show that it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the exercise of power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. warrants application of judicial mind as a court of law is involved and the said proceedings are on a higher footing than the proceedings under Section 154 Cr.P.C. It was further observed that in the application under Section 156(3)Cr.P.C., it wa....
The Police, however, hushed up the matter by obtaining her signatures on a pre-written statement, which was recorded in Urdu on 13.03.2019 as the respondent No. 3 was never aware about the contents of the same. The respondent No. 3, thereafter, was constrained to file the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
However, if in fact it is a civil dispute, it may require a little clarification. The petitioner filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
For filing an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, both these aspects must be spelt out in the application and documentary proof of this must also be filed. Apart from this, in para 31 of Priyanka Srivastava's case 2015 (3) ALT (Crl.) 26 (SC) : (2015) 6 SCC 287 (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has clearly held that there has to be a prior application under Section 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
