top of page
Magistrate has duty to ensure fair probe after passing order u/s 156 (3) CrPC
Madhav Singh Vs State of UP and Anr
APPLICATION u.s 482 No. 23727 of 2021
About/from the judgment:
Magistrate can't wash his hands of the case after passing an order under Section 156 (3) CrPC!
The High Court has observed that the Magistrate cannot wash his hands of the case after passing an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C and that it is the duty of the Magistrate to ensure that investigation is done impartially and in a fair manner.
The Bench observed thus while referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & others, 2008 (60) ACC 689, wherein the Apex Court held thus:
"...there is an implied power in the Magistrate under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to order registration of a criminal offence and/or to direct the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station to hold a proper investigation and take all such necessary steps that may be necessary for ensuring a proper investigation including monitoring the same."
Essentially, the HC was dealing with a 482 CrPC application filed by Madhav Singh with a grievance that a case registered at his instance under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 409 I.P.C. was not being probed properly.
Further, it was prayed by the Applicant that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura be directed to forward the statement on affidavit as well as other documentary evidence filed on behalf of the applicant to the Investigating Officer and also ensure impartial and fair investigation in the matter.
Lastly, it was submitted that the affidavits of the complainant and the witnesses were filed before the C.J.M., Mathura with a prayer to forward the same to the Investigating Officer, but the prayer was rejected with an order dated September 16, 2021 on the ground that the informant himself may produce his affidavit before the competent authority.
Taking note of the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Sakiri Vasu, the Court opined that when the complainant had alleged that the statements of the complainant and the witnesses have not been recorded by the Investigating Officer, the Magistrate could have forwarded the affidavits filed on behalf of the applicant to the Investigating Officer.
Further, stressing that the Magistrate cannot wash his hands of the case after passing an order under Section 156 (3) CrPC, the Court quashed the order passed by the C.J.M., Mathura and the CJM was directed to forward the affidavits filed by the applicant to the Investigating Officer and to ensure fair investigation.
"The applicant may also approach the Higher Police Authorities for redressal of his grievance," the Court added as it disposed of the application.
Read the Judgment
Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!
Formats for use
bottom of page