Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Nikhil s/o Dhondiram Katke, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenging an order dated 14.8.2018 passed by the learned Magistrate at Parli-Vaijnath, District Beed. The Magistrate had refused to order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and instead granted liberty to the applicant to proceed under Section 200 CrPC by treating the application as a complaint under Section 2(d) CrPC. The applicant contended that the Magistrate was duty-bound to refer the matter to police for investigation and that the impugned order was erroneous and illegal. The High Court heard the matter with consent of both sides and reserved judgment on 11th April 2019, pronouncing it on 25th April 2019. The court examined the scope of Section 156(3) CrPC and the Magistrate's discretion. It held that the Magistrate has the discretion to either order police investigation or treat the application as a complaint. The impugned order was found to be within the Magistrate's powers and not illegal. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the application, upholding the Magistrate's order.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Section 156(3) CrPC - Magistrate's Discretion - The Magistrate has the discretion to either order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC or treat the application as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC. The impugned order refusing to order investigation and granting liberty to file complaint was held to be within the Magistrate's powers and not illegal. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Magistrate was justified in refusing to order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and instead treating the application as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the application, upholding the Magistrate's order as within his discretion.
Law Points
- Section 156(3) CrPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- Magistrate's discretion
- Police investigation
- Complaint procedure
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (04) 45
Criminal Application No. 2816 of 2018
Mr. V.D. Sapkal h/f Mr. A.D. Wange for applicant, Mr. K.D. Munde APP for respondent No.1, Mr. S.B. Solanke for respondent No.4, Mr. P.P. More for respondent Nos. 6 and 7
Nikhil s/o Dhondiram Katke
The State of Maharashtra and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application under Section 482 CrPC challenging the order of Magistrate refusing to order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought to set aside the impugned order and direct the Magistrate to reconsider the application for police investigation.
Filing Reason
The applicant was dissatisfied with the Magistrate's order dated 14.8.2018 which refused to order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and instead treated the application as a complaint.
Previous Decisions
The learned Magistrate passed the impugned order in Misc. Criminal Application No. 356 of 2018 on 14.8.2018.
Issues
Whether the Magistrate was justified in refusing to order police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and instead treating the application as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that the Magistrate was duty-bound to refer the matter to police for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC and the impugned order was erroneous and illegal.
Ratio Decidendi
The Magistrate has the discretion under Section 156(3) CrPC to either order police investigation or treat the application as a complaint under Section 200 CrPC. The impugned order was not illegal.
Judgment Excerpts
The applicant, taking recourse of remedy under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, preferred the present application to agitate the validity and propriety of the impugned order dated 14.8.2018 passed in Misc. Cri. Application No. 356 of 2018 by the learned Magistrate at Parli-Vaijnath, Dist. Beed, thereby rebuffing the relief prayed to make over the investigation to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code; instead, the liberty was granted to the applicant to adopt the later course under Section 200 of the Code by treating the application filed by the applicant as complaint under Section 2(d) of the Code.
Procedural History
The applicant filed Misc. Criminal Application No. 356 of 2018 before the Magistrate at Parli-Vaijnath seeking police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC. The Magistrate passed the impugned order on 14.8.2018 refusing the relief and granting liberty to file complaint. The applicant then filed the present application under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 2(d), 156(3), 200, 482
