Bombay High Court Quashes Magistrate's Order for Police Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC in Private Complaint — Magistrate Lacks Power to Direct Investigation After Taking Cognizance Under Section 201 CrPC. The court held that once cognizance is taken, the Magistrate must follow the procedure under Sections 200-203 CrPC and cannot resort to Section 156(3) CrPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 81
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicants, 14 individuals, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging an order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Chikhali. The Magistrate had, while allowing a petition (private complaint) against the applicants, directed that the complaint be forwarded for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, with a direction to register an FIR and investigate the matter. The complainant was also directed to provide a Marathi translation of the petition for the purpose of the FIR. The applicants contended that the Magistrate had no power to pass such an order in view of Section 201 CrPC. The High Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the complaint and then proceeded to pass the impugned order. The court held that once a Magistrate takes cognizance of a private complaint, the procedure under Chapter XV of CrPC (Sections 200 to 203) must be followed. Section 201 CrPC provides that if a complaint is not made by a competent court or if the complaint is not cognizable by that court, the Magistrate shall return the complaint for presentation to the proper court or dismiss it. The Magistrate cannot, after taking cognizance, direct investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. The High Court, therefore, quashed the impugned order and allowed the application.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Private Complaint - Investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC - Section 201 CrPC - Magistrate lacks power to direct police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC after taking cognizance of a private complaint, as Section 201 CrPC mandates dismissal of complaint if not made by a competent court or if the complaint is not cognizable by that court - Held that the impugned order was without jurisdiction and quashed (Paras 3-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a Magistrate, after taking cognizance of a private complaint and finding that the complaint should be forwarded for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, has the power to do so in view of Section 201 CrPC?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the application and quashed the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Chikhali, directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Law Points

  • Section 201 CrPC bars Magistrate from ordering investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC after taking cognizance of a private complaint
  • Section 482 CrPC inherent powers
  • Section 156(3) CrPC police investigation
  • Section 200 CrPC examination of complainant
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (08) 140

Criminal Application (APL) No.531/2012

2012-08-13

A.P. Bhangale, J.

Mr. R.M. Patwardhan, Mr. P. B. Patil for applicants; Mr. K.L. Dharmadhikari, APP for respondent No.1; None for respondent No.2

Dilip s/o Ramrao Khedekar and 13 others

State of Maharashtra and Bhimerao Shriram More

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal application under Section 482 CrPC challenging Magistrate's order directing police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC in a private complaint.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the Magistrate's order dated 13/08/2012 directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Filing Reason

The applicants contended that the Magistrate had no power to pass the impugned order after taking cognizance of the complaint, in view of Section 201 CrPC.

Previous Decisions

The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Chikhali, had allowed the petition (private complaint) and directed forwarding the complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Issues

Whether a Magistrate, after taking cognizance of a private complaint, can direct investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC? Whether Section 201 CrPC bars such an order?

Submissions/Arguments

Learned Advocate for applicants submitted that the learned Magistrate had no power to pass impugned order in view of Section 201 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Ratio Decidendi

Once a Magistrate takes cognizance of a private complaint, he must follow the procedure under Sections 200 to 203 CrPC and cannot direct investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. Section 201 CrPC mandates that if the complaint is not made to a competent court or is not cognizable by that court, the complaint must be returned or dismissed, not forwarded for investigation.

Judgment Excerpts

Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that the learned Magistrate had no power to pass impugned order in view of Section 201 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Procedural History

The applicants filed a criminal application under Section 482 CrPC before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Chikhali, dated 13/08/2012, which directed investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC in a private complaint. The High Court heard the matter and allowed the application, quashing the impugned order.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 156(3), 201, 482
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Magistrate's Order for Police Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC in Private Complaint — Magistrate Lacks Power to Direct Investigation After Taking Cognizance Under Section 201 CrPC. The court held that once cognizanc...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner to Recall Document for Evidence in Civil Suit — Inherent Power Under Section 151 CPC Can Be Invoked for Recall of Document from Collector's Office for Purpose of Tendering in Evidence