Interim Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 22
CT Cases 259/2024
RAKSHA SINGHAL Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR
AND ORS.
06.08.2024
Present: Sh. Anil, Counsel for Complainant with Complainant.
Arguments heard on ATR.
List for orders at 04.00 p.m.
(Pankaj Rai)
JMFC-01/NE/KKD/06.08.2024
At 04.00 p.m.
1. The complainant has filed the complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C alongwith an application u/s
156 (3) Cr.P.C. On the application of the complainant, status report was called from the SHO, PS
concerned. The status report was filed by HC Gunjan and forwarded by DCP concerned. In the
status report, it has been mentioned that the matter pertains to day to day altercations between the
neighbours regarding parking of vehicles and that both the sites have been booked under Section
107/151 Cr. PC before the Court of SEM, Seelampur.
2. I have gone through the complaint, the annexures and the status report / ATR filed
by the police. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents / proposed
accused person. Briefly stated the complainant has alleged that accused persons regularly abuses
her and threw fire crackers inside her house and that they have tried to ram her with the intention
of killing her and that the accused persons somehow wants to pressurize her to sell the house and
that they have entered complainant’s house and threatened her that they would teach her lesson.
That on 22.01.2024, accused no. 14 was burning fire crackers outside her house and due to smoke
of fire crackers she was having difficulty in breathing and that on one day, accused no. 1 alongwith
his son pulled the iron gate of complainant’s house and his the complainant and that the accused
persons have abused her when the marriage took place and that on another day, the accused
-- 1 of 3 --
persons created a dent on the car parked outside the complainant’s house with a cricket bat. That
a complaint was made to the police but no action was taken. Hence, the present complaint.
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 implies that the police is bound to register an FIR when an information regarding
cognizable offence is given to the police, whereas the Magistrate is not bound to give directions
u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C, even though the complaint discloses the commission of a cognizable offence as
the Magistrate has to see whether the investigation by the police is required or not in the given
case.
4. In the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court titled as Subharkaran Luharka
v. State DoD 9-7-2010 delivered in Crl. 6122/23/05, it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court
that if the evidence is within the reach of the complainant and no investigation by the police is
required, the Magistrate should ask the complainant to lead the evidence rather than giving
directions to the police for registration of FIR u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C.
5. In the another judgment titled as M/s. Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. State, 2001
IV AD (Delhi) the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has observed as under :
“It is true that Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. of the Code empowers to Magistrate to direct
the police to register a case and initiate investigations but this power has to be exercised
judiciously on proper grounds and not in a mechanical manner. In those cases where the
allegations are not very serious and the complainant himself is in possession of evidence to prove
his 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”.
-- 2 of 3 --
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 pre-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
proposed accused person. From the material on record, the entire evidence is within the reach of
the complainant and no investigation by the police is required at this stage. Needless to say that if
required later on, the investigation may be directed u/s 202 Cr.P.C. In view of the aforesaid
reasons, the application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C is dismissed and therefore, the same is dismissed. Let
the complainant be granted an opportunity to lead pre summoning evidence in support of his
allegations. Be put up on 18.12.2024 for pre summoning evidence.
(Pankaj Rai)
JMFC-01/NE/KKD/06.08.2024
-- 3 of 3 --