Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Magistrate can invoke section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and forward a complaint for police investigation when the complaint is made by a public servant in discharge of official duty under section 200(a) of the Code.
Analysis: The complaint was instituted by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax after enquiry and sanction, in relation to offences under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the Indian Penal Code. In such a situation, the complaint is not one requiring a parallel police investigation, because the special statutory scheme under the Income-tax Act and the fact that the complainant is a public servant acting in the discharge of official duty require the Magistrate to proceed on the complaint itself. Resort to section 156(3) would lead to duplication of investigation and the possibility of conflicting conclusions, thereby undermining the enquiry already made by the income-tax authorities.
Conclusion: The Magistrate could not forward the complaint to the police under section 156(3); the proper course was to proceed under section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a complaint is filed by a public servant in the discharge of official duty, the Magistrate should not direct police investigation under section 156(3) and must proceed under section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.