Interim Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: CC No. 8399/24
Anil vs Tushar & Ors
04.02.2025 P.S. Prem Nagar
Present: Ld proxy counsel for the complainant
Arguments on application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. have already
been heard.
As per the complaint, it is the case of complainant, that on
28.04.2024 at about 10:30 pm, accused no. 1 (who is the son of the
father in law of the complainant) alongwith other accused persons
Vijay, Sachin and some other persons, broke the door of the house of
the complainant, entered in the house and when the complainant
objected and asked them to stop, accused Tushar hit the complainant
with a brick on his head, threatened to kill him and they all started
abusing and beating the complainant, that the parents of the
complainant tried to protect him, upon which the accused persons
misbehaved with his parents, they threw the complainant due to which
he received grievous injury on his head due to which blood started
coming out, and then all the accused persons fled away from the spot.
It is submitted that MLC was prepared. Complainant gave a written
complaint to SHO PS Prem Nagar and DCP concerned but action was
not taken. Since the police did not take appropriate action against the
accused persons, the complainant approached this court along with the
present complaint seeking a direction to be given to police to register
an FIR under appropriate provisions of law.
ATR was called and received. Perused. As per the ATR,
matter is stated to be a dispute between husband and wife. The
complainant and his wife are started to be residing separately. It is
further submitted in the ATR that on 28.04.2024, the complainant
himself went to argue with his wife and himself fell down and
sustained injuries, that the statements of neighbours were recorded as
1
-- 1 of 3 --
per which no one had caused injuries to the complainant and he had
himself fallen down and sustained injuries. No cognizable offence is
stated to be made out and present complaint is stated to have been filed
by the complainant pressurise his wife and her family.
During arguments, Ld. Counsel for complainant reiterated
the facts of the case and stated that the complaint was clearly
disclosing commission of cognizable offence by the accused persons,
as alleged in the complaint, and it was the duty of the police to register
an FIR and investigate into the matter.
It is trite that power u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. to order
registration of FIR has to be exercised judiciously and not in a
mechanical manner. Only when the allegations are grave and
complainant himself is not in a position to collect and produce
evidence before the Court, the court should direct registration of FIR
and initiation of police investigation. The Hon’ble High Court of
Delhi, in
M/S Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs. State, (2001) 92 DLT
217, while laying down the circumstances in which the magistrate can
exercise his powers u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. to order registration of FIR,
held:
“7. It is true that Section 156(3) of the Code empowers a 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 complaint 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. The discretion ought to be exercised after proper
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 complaint
himself may not be in a position to collect and produce evidence before
the Court and interests of justice demand that the police should step in
to help the complaint. The police assistance can be taken by a
Magistrate even under Sec. 202(1) of the Code after taking cognizance
and proceeding with the complaint under Chapter XV of the Code as
held by Apex Court in 2001 (1) Supreme page 129 titled “Suresh
Chand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.”
Record perused. As per the facts of the case, matter
2
-- 2 of 3 --
appears to be matrimonial dispute between the parties. As per ATR, no
cognizable offence is made out and present complaint is stated to have
been filed by the complainant to pressurise his wife and her family. As
per the MLC, abrasion over right parietal region is stated to have been
caused. Except offence punishable u/s 323 IPC, prima facie, no other
offence as alleged appears to be made out. Further complainant also
appears to be in the possession of relevant evidence. Custodial
interrogation of accused persons is not required. Hence, at this stage,
there is no requirement of police intervention; however, after
examination of the complainant, if any police assistance is required,
the Court can direct police investigation u/s 202(1) Cr.P.C.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, this court is
of the view that no ground is made out for this court to exercise
jurisdiction u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. Hence, the prayer u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. for
registration of FIR is declined. Put up for pre-summoning evidence on
04.08.2025.
(Nidhi Chitkara)
JMIC-06, NW, Rohini, Delhi
04.02.2025
3
-- 3 of 3 --