Interim Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 42
CC No.2238-2024
Himanshu Vs. Madhav
20.11.2025
Regular Stenographer of this Court is on leave today.
Present: None for complainant.
Be passed over for 04:30 pm for orders.
At 4:45 pm
Present: None for complainant.
Vide this order, I shall decide the application filed by the complainant u/S
175 (3) BNSS seeking issuance of direction to the SHO concerned to register FIR
against the accused/alleged u/S 318/336/351 BNS.
Briefly stated, it has been submitted by the complainant that the proposed
accused came to the complainant’s office situated at is Hazari Court and allured
the complainant that the proposed accused is a professional dancer and that if the
complainant makes investment in his dance academy proposed to be opened by
him, complainant will be able to generate profits of Rs. 15,000/- per month since
the proposed accused has a huge amount of followers and students, and believing
him to be true and correct, the complainant gave a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-to the
proposed accused. However, the proposed accused never paid the profits promised
by him and whenever the complainant tried to contact him, he threatened the
complainant stating that “if he follows him, he will kill the complainant”. It has
been further alleged that the proposed accused in presence of unknown persons
stated “
isko nakhli certificate dikha ke chutiya banaya ab mera kabad le”.
It has been alleged that due to the allurement of the proposed accused,
wrongful loss has been caused to the complainant and wrongful gain to the
-- 1 of 3 --
complainant and that proposed accused has duped the complainant for a sum of
Rs. 1,00,000/- and that it was his intention from the very beginning to dupe the
complainant. It has been further submitted that the proposed accused has himself
created a forged certificate to dupe the complainant. It is submitted that a
complaint dated 07.09.2024 was filed before Police Post Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
vide DD No. 7/PP/THC dated 10.09.2024, however, no action was taken by
Police. Thereafter, the complainant made a detailed representation dated
13.11.2024 before the DCP concerned but in vain.
Action taken report was filed by Enquiry Officer, SI Neeraj, duly forwarded
by Chowki Incharge, Police Post, THC, whereby it has been stated that during
enquiry, alleged was contacted telephonically who had stated that the complainant
had willingly invested in his Dance Academy and that he has returned the whole
amount to the complainant.
During the course of arguments, the facts narrated above were reiterated by
the counsel for the complainant which are not repeated herein for the sake of
brevity. Ld. Counsel for the complainant had further submitted that the investment
amount was paid to the proposed accused in instalments through bank
transfers/online payments and bank account statement of the complainant has been
filed along with the present application. Clarifications were also sought from the
Enquiry Officer.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
It is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case titled
M/S. Skipper Beverages Pvt Ltd. vs State, 92 (2001) DLT 217 has held that:
“10. Section 156(3) of the Code aims at curtailing and controlling the arbitrariness
on the part of the police authorities in the matter of registration of FIRs and taking
up investigations, even in those cases where the same are warranted. The Section
empower the Magistrate to issue directions in this regard but this provision should
not be permitted to be misused by the complainants to get police cases registered
even in those cases which are not very serious in nature and the Magistrate himself
can hold enquiry under Chapter XV and proceed against the accused if required.
-- 2 of 3 --
Therefore, a Magistrate, must apply his mind before passing an order under
Section 156(3) of the Code and must not pass these orders mechanically on the
mere asking by the complainant. These powers ought to be exercised primarily in
those cases where the allegations are quite serious or evidence is beyond the reach
of complainant or custodial interrogation appears to be necessary for some
recovery of article or discovery of fact.”
It is a matter of record that the alleged offence is based on the testimony of
the complainant and the other necessary documents, such as the bank account
statement and WhatsApp screenshot, which are already in possession of the
complainant. Further, the facts alleged by the complainant are also not complex,
which requires field investigation by a police official or that the scientific
examination is required. It is pertinent to note that the true test to execise
discretion to order investigation by police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C is not
whether any cognizable offence is committed or not, but whether an investigation
by police agency is required or not.
Thus, in view of the above discussion and considering the totality of
circumstances, no ground is made out to allow the present application as there is
nothing new which can be unearthed by directing another investigation into the
matter. Needless to say if the need for police investigation arises in future,
recourse to provisions of Section 202 CrPC/225 BNSS could be taken at the
appropriate stage. Accordingly, the present application filed by the
complainant/applicant u/S 175(3) BNSS stands disposed of as dismissed.
Put up for PSE on 20.01.2025.
(Preeti Rajoria)
JMFC-07/Central District
Delhi/20.11.2025
-- 3 of 3 --