Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Abhishek Dinkar Ekal, was the original complainant in an FIR dated 25.09.2014 registered against eight persons for offences under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and subsequently under the Information Technology Act, 2000. The accused persons filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 671 of 2015 before the Bombay High Court seeking quashing of the FIR. The High Court granted ad-interim relief restraining the filing of a charge-sheet without leave of the court, but clarified that investigation could continue. Upon completion of investigation, the investigating agency submitted a 'C' Summary Report, indicating that the case was false or lacked sufficient evidence. The accused's writ petition was disposed of on 15.07.2019, with the High Court observing that the complainant could file a protest petition before the Magistrate. The petitioner filed a protest petition before the Metropolitan Magistrate, who dismissed it and accepted the 'C' Summary Report by order dated 13.08.2019. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The High Court examined the Magistrate's order and found that it merely stated that the protest petition was dismissed and the 'C' Summary was accepted without any discussion of the merits of the protest petition or the material on record. The High Court held that the Magistrate had failed to apply judicial mind and had mechanically accepted the police report. The court set aside the Magistrate's order and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for fresh consideration, directing the Magistrate to hear the parties and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within four weeks.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - 'C' Summary Report - Protest Petition - Duty of Magistrate - The Magistrate must apply judicial mind to the protest petition and the material on record before accepting a 'C' Summary Report. Merely dismissing the protest petition without considering its merits and without recording reasons amounts to a mechanical acceptance of the police report, which is unsustainable in law. (Paras 5-7) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 173 - Final Report - 'C' Summary - The Investigating Agency's 'C' Summary Report is not binding on the Magistrate. The Magistrate has the discretion to accept the report, take cognizance, or order further investigation. The complainant's protest petition must be considered independently. (Paras 5-7) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 156(3) - Protest Petition - The Magistrate is required to consider the protest petition as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC if the Magistrate disagrees with the 'C' Summary Report. The Magistrate must pass a reasoned order. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Magistrate was justified in accepting the 'C' Summary Report and dismissing the protest petition without considering the merits of the protest petition and without applying judicial mind to the material on record.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 13.08.2019 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, and remanded the matter back to the Magistrate for fresh consideration. The Magistrate was directed to hear the parties and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Law Points
- Duty of Magistrate to consider protest petition on merits
- 'C' Summary Report acceptance requires application of judicial mind
- Magistrate cannot accept police report without considering complainant's objections
