Interim Order 11

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: discretionary remedy as the provision proceeds with the word “May”. The magistrate
is required to exercise his mind while doing so. He should pass orders only if he is
satisfied that the information reveals commission of cognizable offences and also
about necessity of police investigation for digging out of evidence neither in
possession of the complainant nor can be procured without the assistance of the
police. It is thus not necessary that in every case where a complaint has been filed
under section 200 of the code the Magistrate should direct the police to investigate
the crime merely because an application has also been filed under section 156 (3) if
the code even though the evidence to be led by the complainant is in his possession
or can be produced by summoning witnesses, may be with the assistance of the court
or otherwise. This issue of jurisdiction also becomes important at that stage and
cannot be ignored”.
7. In the present case, the complainant is aware about the name and address
of the respondents. As per ATR, reply was sought from Chief Architect, Department
of Architecture and Environs NDMC New Delhi in which it was mentioned that it is
not possible for someone to misuse an architect’s registration and cancellation
without his / her knowledge. Further, the reply mentions that when an architect
submits a case in NDMC for approval, an authentication SMS is generated through
the OBBS portal in the registered mobile number of the owner as well as the architect
for verification through the system on its own and the application is submitted only
after verification is completed by both the owner as well as the architect. Further, the
chief architect NDMC had denied any misuse of architect registration and credentials
of complainant in any way in the NDMC. Thus, no cognizable offence was made out.
It appears that the entire evidence is within the reach of the complainant and no
investigation by the police is required at this stage. The mobile number on which the
verification messages must have been received must be in possession of the
complainant. His credentials are also in his possession. Thus, the documentary
evidence is also within the reach of the complainants. Therefore, in these
circumstances, there is no requirement of registration of FIR or investigation by the
-- 1 of 1 --