Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 63
Ct Cases / 1612/2025
Rahul Tyagi Vs. Rajiv Kumar / ()
10.03.2026
Present : Complainant in person with counsel Sh. Ashish Passi.
Matter is listed for orders on application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C.
1. The complainant has filed the complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. an application
u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. On the application Action Taken Report was called from the SHO,
PS B K Road. The Action Taken Report was filed by IO SI Deepak Malik.
2. I have gone through the complaint, the annexures and the status
report/ATR filed by the police SI Deepak Malik. The complainant has filed the
present complaint against the respondents. The allegations put forth by the
complainant in brief is that he is the ex employee of the respondent company M/s R-
Zone Builtech Pvt. Ltd. and worked there as architect. Respondent Rajeev Kumar had
collected his credential at the time of interview and after that he misused the
credentials to seek approval from NDMC and competent authorities without his
knowledge. A complaint has been made to SHO PS B K Road and DCP, however, no
action has been taken.
3. I have heard the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the
complainant. It is settled proposition of law that the power of the Magistrate to give
directions u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C is discretionary and the same has to be exercised only
when there is requirement of investigation / custodial interrogation by the police. If
the evidence is within the reach of complainant, usually the directions u/s 156 (3)
Cr.P.C are not given. The word used in the section 156 (3) Cr.P.C is “may”, whereas
the word used in section 154 Cr.P.C is “shall”. The wording of these section clearly
-- 1 of 1 --