Case Note & Summary
The petitioner challenged the registration of a crime under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for criminal intimidation, on the ground that the Magistrate's order permitting investigation under Section 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was passed without application of mind. The dispute arose from a complaint filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioner alleging threats to life. Since Section 506 is a non-cognizable offence, the police sought the Magistrate's permission. The Magistrate's order merely stated "Perused the requisition seeking permission to register FIR in non-cognizable case. Permitted to register and investigate in accordance with law." The petitioner argued that the informant should have been referred to the Magistrate and that the order lacked any reasoning, indicating non-application of mind. The State supported the order, contending no elaborate order was required. The court examined Section 155 of the CrPC, emphasizing that sub-section (1) requires the police to refer the informant to the Magistrate, and sub-section (2) mandates that no investigation of a non-cognizable offence can commence without the Magistrate's order. The court held that the order must reflect application of mind; a mere endorsement such as 'permitted' or 'perused permitted' is insufficient and renders the proceedings void. Relying on earlier judgments, the court quashed the proceedings in Crime No.116/2023, holding that the Magistrate's order was mechanical and vitiated the investigation. The writ petition was allowed, and the FIR and consequent investigation were quashed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Investigation of Non-cognizable Offences - Application of Mind by Magistrate - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 155(2) - The Magistrate granted permission to investigate a non-cognizable offence under Section 506 of IPC by stating "Perused the requisition... Permitted to register and investigate". The court held that the order must reflect application of mind, and a mechanical order with words like 'permitted' or 'perused permitted' is insufficient and vitiates the proceedings (Paras 7-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Magistrate's order granting permission to register an FIR for a non-cognizable offence under Section 506 IPC complied with Section 155(2) CrPC and reflected application of mind.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. The proceedings in Crime No.116/2023 registered by K.R. Puram Police Station were quashed due to non-application of mind by the Magistrate while granting permission under Section 155(2) CrPC.
Law Points
- Magistrate must apply mind while granting permission under Section 155(2) CrPC
- order must reflect application of mind
- mere 'permitted' or 'perused permitted' is insufficient
- informant should be referred to Magistrate under Section 155(1) CrPC
Case Details
2023 LawText (KAR) (06) 44
WRIT PETITION No.11186 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
Satyanarayana Chalke S., Mahesh Shetty
State of Karnataka and Swapna Suresh
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 CrPC challenging the registration of an FIR for a non-cognizable offence on the ground of non-application of mind by the Magistrate while granting permission under Section 155(2) CrPC.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of the FIR and investigation in Crime No.116/2023 registered under Section 506 IPC.
Filing Reason
The Magistrate's order granting permission to register the FIR did not reflect application of mind and was mechanically passed, vitiating the investigation.
Issues
Whether the Magistrate's order granting permission to register an FIR for a non-cognizable offence under Section 506 IPC complied with the requirement of application of mind under Section 155(2) CrPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the informant should have been referred to the Magistrate, and the Magistate's order merely saying 'perused and permitted' lacked application of mind, rendering the proceedings void.
Respondent-State argued that no elaborate order is required and the Magistrate's order was sufficient in law.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 155(2) CrPC, a Magistrate must apply mind and pass an order indicating such application while granting permission to investigate a non-cognizable offence; an order merely using words like 'permitted' or 'perused permitted' without any reasoning is mechanical and violates the requirement of law, vitiating the investigation and subsequent proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
Perused the requisition seeking permission to register FIR in non-cognizable case. Permitted to register and investigate in accordance with law.
the order is perused and permitted. Except saying perused, the requisition and permitted investigation or registration of FIR, there is no indication of any application of mind on the part of the learned Magistrate.
Permitting registration of a FIR cannot be a frolicsome act on the part of the Magistrate. The Magistrate exercises power under sub-section (2) of Section 155 of the Cr.P.C., In doing so, it cannot be that he could pass orders which do not bear a semblance of application of mind.
Procedural History
Complaint filed on 11-03-2023 by respondent No.2 alleging criminal intimidation. K.R. Puram Police recorded a non-cognizable report and sent a requisition to the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate seeking permission to register FIR under Section 506 IPC. Magistrate passed an order 'perused and permitted' on the requisition. FIR registered thereafter. Petitioner filed writ petition challenging the registration on the ground of non-application of mind by the Magistrate.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 506, 503
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 155
