Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: allegations there should be no need to pass orders under Section 156 (3) of the
Code. This discretion ought to be exercised after application of mind and only
in those cases where the Magistrate is of the view that the nature of the
allegations is such that the complainant himself may not be in a position to
collect and produce evidence before the court and interest of justice demand
that the police should step in the help of the complainant”.
6. Also in “Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of MP 2001 (1) AD (Crl.) S.C. 34”
Hon'ble Apex Court stated that “
there are per-requisites to the followed by the
complainant before approaching the Magistrate U/s 156 (3) of the code which is a
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, the grievance pertains to alleged non performance of
service obligations under a mutually executed agreement and does not disclose the
commission of any cognizable offence or criminal intent on part of the opposite party
at the time of entering into contact. The matter is civil in nature and involves is issues
of breach of contact and recovery of money for which appropriate remedy lies before
competent civil court or consumer dispute redressal commission. It appears that the
-- 1 of 1 --