TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether a Magistrate, before taking cognizance, can direct investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and require registration of an FIR; (ii) Whether a petition addressed to a Magistrate alleging commission of offences and seeking action is a complaint within Section 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Issue (i): Whether a Magistrate, before taking cognizance, can direct investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and require registration of an FIR.
Analysis: The scheme of Chapter XII is distinct from Chapter XV. A direction under Section 156(3) is issued before cognizance is taken, and the investigation so ordered is the same kind of investigation contemplated in Chapter XII, culminating in a police report under Section 173. The Court held that once a Magistrate has not taken cognizance, there is no legal bar to directing the police to register an FIR for a cognizable offence disclosed in the complaint. It further held that an express direction to register an FIR is not illegal, because registration is only the formal entry of information relating to a cognizable offence, and the police must register the case to proceed with investigation.
Conclusion: The Magistrate had power to order investigation under Section 156(3) before cognizance and to direct registration of an FIR.
Issue (ii): Whether a petition addressed to a Magistrate alleging commission of offences and seeking action is a complaint within Section 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: Section 2(d) defines complaint broadly as an allegation made to a Magistrate with a view to action under the Code. The Court held that no particular form is required, and the label attached to the petition is immaterial. A writing alleging commission of an offence and seeking suitable action falls within the statutory definition of complaint, unless it is a police report.
Conclusion: The petition was a complaint in law.
Final Conclusion: The High Court's view that the Magistrate lacked power was rejected, and the challenge to the quashing order failed.
Ratio Decidendi: A Magistrate may, before taking cognizance, direct investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, including registration of an FIR for a cognizable offence, and a petition alleging an offence and seeking action is a complaint irrespective of its nomenclature.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
