Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Dated: 27.01.2025
44	44
Ct. Cases 16777/2023	Ct. Cases 16777/2023
RAJBIR Vs. RAJEEV	RAJBIR Vs. RAJEEV
PS (Sultan Puri)	PS (Sultan Puri)
27.01.2025
Present:	Present: None for the complainant.	None for the complainant.
ORDER ON APPLICATION
UNDER SECTION 156(3) Cr.P.C.
1. An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by
the complainant for issuance of directions to SHO for
registration of FIR.
2. The case of the complainant in nutshell is that on
01.09.2023, the complainant alongwith his two friends
namely Parmod and Jaideep had visited at Bullet
Motorcyle Showroom at Y-Block, Mangolpuri. After
sometime, when the complainant alongwith his friends
were having meal, the accused persons reached there and
they were intoxicated. It is stated that accused no. 1 have
used words
Haram ki kamai ka kada hatho mein pehn
rakha hain”/ abusive language to the complainant when he
asked them to not to say like this, the accused persons
started manhandling the complainant and hit on the eyes of
the complainant. Further, he had snatched away the said
kada, thereafter, ran away from the spot. Thereafter, the
complainant made a call at 100 no. and his MLC was
conducted. The complainant visited the PS to lodge the
complaint, but, the same was not lodged and no action was
taken, hence, the present case was filed.
Ct. Cases 16777/2023 Rajbir Vs. Rajeev & Ors. Page No. 1 of 4
-- 1 of 4 --
Dated: 27.01.2025
3. Action Taken Report was received under the signatures of
HC Amit dated 04.05.2024 as per which the court was
apprised that nothing related to bracelet snatching or
robbery came to light from the PCR call DD Entry or the
statement of the complainant recorded at the time of
incident. Further, it was stated that no cognizable offence
was found to have been committed.
4. Arguments have been heard earlier. It was argued on
behalf of the complainant that the FIR be lodged against
the accused person under the appropriate sections of law.
5. Record has been perused. The arguments advanced are
considered.
6.
In the case of Subhkaran Luharuka and Another Vs. State
(2010), Hon’ble High Court of Delhi laid down the
guidelines for giving directions to police to register case
wherein it was held that it is not necessary that in every
case, where a complaint has been filed U/s. 200 CrPC, the
magistrate should direct police to investigate the crime,
merely because an application has also been filed U/s.
156(3) CrPC. Court has to form an opinion as to whether
police investigation in collection of evidence is necessary
or not. It is to be considered as to whether evidence is in
the possession of complainant or can be produced by the
witnesses on being summoned by the court, at the instance
of complainant. Further, before passing any other on an
application U/s. 156 (3) CrPC, magistrate must call for
status report from the police and then form an opinion as
to whether complaint discloses commission of cognizable
Ct. Cases 16777/2023 Rajbir Vs. Rajeev & Ors. Page No. 2 of 4
-- 2 of 4 --
Dated: 27.01.2025
offence or not. He should then satisfy himself about the
need of investigation by the police. In addition thereto, he
should also satisfy himself with regard to necessity to
direct police to investigate the matter for collection of
evidence, which is neither in the possession of
complainant 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.
7. Now in the instant case the point of consideration
hereunder is as to whether in the given circumstances a
direction for lodging of a FIR and investigation into the
matter is required or not. The case of the complainant is
completely based upon the allegations.
8. The Complainant has not stated as to what further evidence
is required through investigation to prove his case. Though
the complainant has annexed a photograph of his face
depicting a red eye and a bruise under the same. However,
as per the copy of MLC on record, the said injury is opined
to be simple and an NCR for the same bearing no.
0128/2023 dated 16.11.2023 under Section 323/34 IPC has
already been lodged.
9. Further, the facts and circumstances of the case are such
that an investigation on any technical aspect is not required
in the present case. Even otherwise, the running of the
state machinery has to be justified on material ground.
Moreover, if court is of the opinion that any inquiry or
investigation is necessary, then it can postpone the issue of
Ct. Cases 16777/2023 Rajbir Vs. Rajeev & Ors. Page No. 3 of 4
-- 3 of 4 --
Dated: 27.01.2025
process against the accused persons and inquire itself or
direct an investigation to be made by police officer or
appropriate person under the relevant provisions.
10.Keeping in mind the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it
does not appear that investigation by police is necessary as
the case of the complainant is completely based on
allegations.
11. Accordingly, an application u/s 156 (3) Cr. P.C made by
the complainant is dismissed.
12.Now, the matter is listed for consideration on the
complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. on 21.04.2025.
Copy dasti.
(Announced and dictated in the
open Court on 27th January, 2025)
(Sanya Dalal)
JMFC-01/North West/Rohini Courts
27.01.2025
Ct. Cases 16777/2023 Rajbir Vs. Rajeev & Ors. Page No. 4 of 4
-- 4 of 4 --