Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Namrata Subhash Pawar, an Assistant in MIDC, challenged the order dated 31.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Criminal Revision Application No. 24 of 2025, which confirmed the order dated 06.05.2025 of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sindhkheda, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 50 of 2025. The Magistrate's order directed registration of crime and investigation under Section 175(3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The complaint was filed by respondent No. 2, a practicing lawyer, alleging irregularities in allotment of plots in Nardana Industrial Area, Sindhkheda, Dhule, and that certain individuals, including the petitioner, obtained allotment in connivance with MIDC officials, committing offences of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and forgery. Pursuant to the Magistrate's order, Crime No. 112 of 2025 was registered at Sindhkheda Police Station. The petitioner approached the Revisional Court, which dismissed the revision. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The High Court examined the order of the Magistrate and found that it was a mechanical order passed without application of judicial mind. The Magistrate merely stated that the complaint discloses commission of cognizable offences and directed registration of FIR and investigation. The Court held that such an order is unsustainable. The Court also noted that the revisional court failed to correct the error. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the orders of the Magistrate and the Revisional Court, and directed that the complaint be placed before the Magistrate for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Magistrate's Power to Order Investigation - Section 175(3) BNSS - The Magistrate must apply judicial mind before passing an order under Section 175(3) BNSS directing registration of FIR and investigation. A mechanical order without considering the allegations and material on record is unsustainable. The order in question was passed without any application of mind and hence quashed. (Paras 5-8) B) Criminal Procedure - Revision Against Order Under Section 175(3) BNSS - Maintainability - The revisional court erred in dismissing the revision without properly appreciating the lack of application of mind by the Magistrate. The order of the revisional court is also set aside. (Paras 6-8) C) Criminal Procedure - Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Interlocutory Orders - The High Court can interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution when the order passed by the Magistrate is without jurisdiction or suffers from patent illegality. (Para 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the learned Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS directing registration of crime and investigation was passed without application of judicial mind and is liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order dated 06.05.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sindhkheda, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 50 of 2025, and the order dated 31.05.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Criminal Revision Application No. 24 of 2025. The complaint was directed to be placed before the Magistrate for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Section 175(3) BNSS
- Magistrate's power to order investigation
- application of judicial mind
- mechanical order
- revision against order under Section 175(3) BNSS
- maintainability of writ petition
