Full Order Text
Order 9 · 17 Apr 2025 · CNR DLNW020229342024
Order Details: COPY OF ORDER Pdf Text: Ct. Cases 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. PS: Ashok Vihar ORDER ON APPLICATION U/S 156(3) Cr.P.C 17.04.2025 Present: Sh. R.S. Sharma, ld. Counsel for complainant. Ld.Counsel has filed compilation of judgments for assistance of the Court. Vide this order, I shall dispose of the application moved by the complainant U/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. Action taken report was called and the same was filed under the signatures of SI Vishal forwarded by the SHO PS: Ashok Vihar. Submissions on the application have been heard. Record including the said reply has been perused. As per the contents of this application it is alleged that father of the complainant Late Sh. Ratan Singh was the owner of house bearing no.WP-550, Village Wazirpur, Delhi and to avoid any controversy between his legal heirs, executed a Will during his lifetime, duly registered with the Sub-Registrar on 16.04.2004. As per the said Will, his father bequeathed some portion of basement, ground floor as well as first floor portion to the applicant and since then the applicant is in possession of abovesaid portion. Further, he alleged that the condition of entire building was very dilapidated and that it may collapse at any moment. So, he got shifted to Budh Vihar, Delhi. It is alleged that alleged accused illegally trespassed into his portion by breaking the locks and removing the articles lying in that portion. Ct. Case 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. Page No.1 of 5 -- 1 of 5 -- Hence, the present complaint. As per the said action taken report, on enquiry, it was revealed that earlier application u/S 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the present applicant has already been dismissed by the Hon’ble Court as well as the revision petition has also been dismissed by the Ld.Sessions Court. Further, many civil matters between parties are pending. It is settled law that U/s. 156(3) Cr.P.C., Magistrate has power to direct the police to register a case and investigate the matter, but his power is to be exercised judiciously and not in a mechanical manner. In the matters where the complainant has in his possession all the evidence required to prove his allegations, there should be no need to pass an order U/s. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. In this regard, reliance is placed, on the decision of our own Hon'ble High Court in M/s. SKIPPER BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE, Cited as 2001 IV AD (Delhi), wherein it has been held as under:- “It is true that Section 156(3) 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 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 complainant himself may not be in a position to collect and produce Ct. Case 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. Page No.2 of 5 -- 2 of 5 -- evidence before the court and interest of justice demand that the police should step in the help the complainant”. Time and again, the Hon'ble Superior Court have taken strong exceptions to the growing tendency of asking the police to investigate cases U/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. of the Code and advised the Magistrate not to pass orders mechanically. Moreover, I am enlightened by the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court titled as “Subhkaran Laharuka & Anr. Vs. State & Anr.” Cited as MANU/DE/1646/2010, wherein it has been held that:- “52A. for the guidance of subordinate courts the procedure to be followed while dealing with an application under section 156(3) of the Code is summarized as under:- (i) Whenever a Magistrate is called upon to pass orders under section 156(3) of the Code, at the outset the Magistrate should ensure that before coming to the Court, the Complainant did approach the police officer in charge of the Police Station having jurisdiction over the area for recording the information available with him disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence by the persons/persons arrayed as an accused in the Complainant. It should also be examined what action was taken by the SHO, or even by the senior officer of the police, when approached by the Complainant under Section 154(3) of the Code. (ii) The Magistrate should then from the own opinion whether the facts mentioned in the complaint disclose commission of cognizable offences by the accused persons arrayed in the Complaint which can be tried in his jurisdiction. He should also satisfy himself about the need for investigation by the Police in the matter. A preliminary enquiry as this is Ct. Case 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. Page No.3 of 5 -- 3 of 5 -- permissible even by an SHO and if no such, enquiry has been done by the SHO then it is all the more necessary for the Magistrate to consider all these factors. For that purpose, the Magistrate must apply his mind and such application of mind should be reflected in the Order passed by him. Upon a preliminary satisfaction, unless there are exceptional circumstances to be recorded in writing, a status report by the police is to be called for before passing final orders. (iii) The Magistrate, when approached with a Complaint under Section 200 of the Code, should invariably proceed under Chapter XV by taking cognizance of the complaint, recording evidence and then deciding the question of issuance of process to the accused. In that case also the Magistrate is fully entitled to postpone the process if it is felt that there is a necessity to call for a police report under Section 202 of the Code. (iv) Of course, it is open to the Magistrate to proceed under Chapter XII of the Code when an application under Section 156(3) of the Code is also filed along with a Complaint under Section 200 of the Code if the Magistrate decides not to take cognizance of the Complaint. However, in that case, the Magistrate, before passing any order to proceed under Chapter XII, should not satisfy himself about the prerequisites as aforesaid, but, additionally, he should also be satisfied that it is necessary to direct police investigation in the matter for collection of evidence which is neither in the possession of the complaint nor can be produced by the witnesses on being summoned by the Court at the instance of complainant, and the matter is such which calls for investigation by a State agency. The Magistrate must pass an order giving cogent reasons as to whey he intends to proceed under Chapter XII instead of Chapter XV of the Code.” Ct. Case 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. Page No.4 of 5 -- 4 of 5 -- Applying the guidelines as mentioned above in the case in hand, the name of the offender and that of the witnesses are well within the knowledge of the complainant/Applicant. All the evidence is available with the complainant and also the witnesses are within the reach of the complainant. No field investigation is required in the present case. No new facts are to be unearthed and no custodial interrogation of any person is required. Moreover, subsequently after evidence of complainant, if it is deemed necessary, police inquiry as envisaged u/s 202 Cr.P.C. can be initiated. Accordingly, the present application U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. is dismissed. The complainant is at liberty to lead PSE. Put up for PSE on 28.07.2025. (VASUNDHRA CHHAUNKAR) CJM (North-West) Rohini Courts, Delhi. 17.04.2025 Ct. Case 9240/2024 Sube Ram Vs. Rohtash & Anr. Page No.5 of 5 -- 5 of 5 --
