Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 22
CT Cases 101/2024
ASHA Vs. RENU AND ORS
27.08.2024
Present: Sh. Naveen Kumar Goyal, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
An application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. and complaint u/s. 200 Cr.PC had
been moved by the applicant against the accused persons with a prayer that the
complaint be sent to the concerned PS for registration of FIR. In view of application
u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C., Status report was summoned from the concerned PS.
Arguments are heard on the application. The case is fixed for orders today itself.
ORDER
In brief, the fact of the complaint is that complainant Asha is residing
at IX/435, Subash Mohalla, Gandhi Nagar. It is stated that accused no 01 Renu and
accused no.2 Pawan are sister in law (Bhabhi) and brother respectively, of the
complainant who are also residing in the same property. It is the allegation of the
complainant that on 27.09.2023, she was sitting in her room and suddenly both the
accused persons attacked her with a sharp edged weapon on her forehead,
complainant was medically examined at Swami Dayanand Hospital. Thereafter,
NCR was lodged vide No. 56/2023 dated 28.09.2023 u/s. 323/506/34 IPC against
the accused persons. Thereafter, complainant made her complaint to concerned PS,
however, no action was taken against the accused persons, hence she approached
this court.
ATR was called from concerned PS. It is stated by the ASI Jitender
that there is a property dispute and between the parties and a civil suit is also
pending before Civil Judge Shahdara. Further no cognizable offence is made out
upon the complaint.
-1-
-- 1 of 3 --
I have heard the Ld. Counsel for applicant/complainant at length.
Before deciding the present application, it becomes imperative to keep in
consideration the circumstances when such an application u/s 156 (3 ) (C) Cr.PC
should be entertained by the court. In Ms. Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State
2002 Crl. LJ NOC 333 (DELHI), the circumstance when the power of Magistrate
u/s 156 (3) Cr.PC should be exercised, has been explained. It was held that:
' 'Section 156 empowers magistrates to direct
police to register case and initiate investigation but this
power had to be exercised judiciously not in mechanical
manner. Those cases, where allegations are not very serious
and applicant himself is in possession of evidence to prove
allegations, there should be no need to pass order u/s 156
Cr.PC. But, cases where magistrate is of the view that nature
of allegation is such that applicant himself may not be in
possession to collect and produce evidence before court, and
interest of justice demand that police should step into to help
applicant, police assistance can be taken.''
It was again held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Mohd. Salim vs.
State in Crl.M.C.No. 3601/2009 decided on 10th March, 2010
that
"In fact, the Magistrate ought to direct investigation by the
Police only where the assistance of the Investigating Agency
is necessary and the Court feels that the cause of justice is
likely to suffer in the absence of investigation by the Police.
The Magistrate is not expected to mechanically direct
investigation by the Police without first examining whether
in the facts and circumstances of the case, investigation by
the State machinery is actually required or not. If the
allegations made in the application are simple, where the
Court can straightaway proceed to conduct the trial, the
Magistrate is expected to record evidence and proceed
further in the matter, instead of passing the buck to the
Police under Section 156(3) of the Code." Same was the
view of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Subhkaran Luharuka &
Anr. vs State & Anr. Crl.M.C. No.6122-23/2005 decided on
9 July, 2010.
-2-
-- 2 of 3 --
Now coming to the facts of the present case and after going through
the application and complaint of the applicant/complainant, the court is of opinion
that all the facts of the dispute are within the knowledge of the applicant and even
the identity of the respondents is known and there is no requirement of any police
investigation. Evidence can be taken very easily without police investigation. So, in
the facts of the present case, there appears no requirement of police investigation.
Further, if there is any need, police inquiry can be had u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Accordingly
with the above observations, application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
However, I take cognizance of the offence u/s 200 Cr.P.C. The case be
relisted for pre-summoning evidence. The complainant is directed to produce
evidence and witnesses at his own efforts. Put up for PSE for 22.11.2024.
(ARVIND DEV)
JMIC(East)KKD/Delhi
27.08.2024
-3-
-- 3 of 3 --