Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Ravikumar, filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the order dated 30.07.2015 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chikmagaluru, in C.C. No. 620/2015 (Crime No. 23/2014). The Magistrate had rejected the 'B' final report filed by the police and directed registration of a criminal case against the petitioner for offences under Sections 354D, 506, and 507 IPC. The FIR was lodged by respondent No.1, Smt. K.M.C. Vasantha, alleging that the petitioner sent filthy messages to her phone and threatened her with dire consequences. The police investigated and filed a 'B' report (closure report). The Magistrate, without issuing notice to the informant or recording reasons, rejected the 'B' report and directed the police to register a case. The High Court held that the Magistrate's order was passed without proper application of mind and without following the procedure under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The court observed that the Magistrate must consider the police report and documents, and if dissatisfied, may take cognizance under Section 190 Cr.P.C. or direct further investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., but must pass a speaking order. The impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remitted back to the Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Final Report - Rejection of 'B' Report - Section 173 Cr.P.C. - The Magistrate, while considering a final report, must apply his mind to the police report and the documents sent with it. Rejecting a 'B' report without recording reasons or issuing notice to the informant is improper. The order directing registration of a case without following the procedure under Section 173 Cr.P.C. is liable to be quashed. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Power to Take Cognizance - Section 190 Cr.P.C. - The Magistrate can take cognizance of an offence even after a 'B' report, but only after proper application of mind and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the informant. The order must be a speaking order. (Paras 4-6) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Stalking and Criminal Intimidation - Sections 354D, 506, 507 IPC - Allegations of sending filthy messages and threats via phone. The court held that the Magistrate's order rejecting the 'B' report was not sustainable as it did not consider the police investigation and was passed mechanically. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Magistrate was justified in rejecting the 'B' final report submitted by the police and directing registration of criminal case against the accused without proper application of mind and without following the procedure under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 30.07.2015 passed by the Prl. Sr. C.J. and C.J.M., Chikmagaluru in C.C. No. 620/2015 (Crime No. 23/2014) is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after hearing both sides and after proper application of mind.
Law Points
- Magistrate's power to reject final report
- Section 173 Cr.P.C.
- Section 190 Cr.P.C.
- Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
- Stalking
- Criminal intimidation
- Quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
