Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, March 25
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the refusal of a magistrate to refer a case to the police under Section 156(3) of the CrPC and treating the matter like a private complaint did not tantamount to declaration of the other person/party’s innocence. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi added that a Magistrate had the discretion to decline a complainant’s prayer under Section 156(3) and treat the case like a private complaint as envisaged under Chapter XV CrPC.
The ruling by Justice Bedi came in a land dispute after one of the parties moved the HC for quashing an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate First Class, vide which his application under Section 156(3) was dismissed and the court directed the complainant to get himself examined, thereby treating the matter as a complaint case.
Refusing to interfere with the order, Justice Bedi added a perusal of the provisions of the CrPC and the settled proposition of law clearly revealed that the Magistrate had the discretion to refer the case to the investigating agency under Section 156(3) for the registration of an FIR, which would be at the pre-cognisance stage. He could also choose to take cognisance and treat the complaint as one under Chapter XV CrPC, record the complainant’s statement and proceed thereafter in accordance with law. “In view of it, no fault can be found with the Magistrate having exercised one of the two options available to him,” Justice Bedi asserted.
Dismissing the petition, Justice Bedi added the Magistrate may, in addition, also order another inquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC, if he thought it fit to satisfy himself regarding the allegations. The complainant, as such, had multiple opportunities to bring forth all the necessary material before the court.
Magistrate's refusal to entertain FIR registration plea isn't clean chit: High Court
{$excerpt:n}
