Tilakdhari vs State Of U.P. & Anr.
Date of Judgement- 18March 2021
Court- High Court of Allahabad
Case Type- Criminal Appeal No. 552 of 2021
Appellant- Tilakdhari
Respondent- State of U.P &Anr.
Bench- Virender Kumar, Ii
Referred- Section 156(3),190,202 CrPC
FACTS OF THE CASE-
The appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seeks to overturn an order denying the complainant’s First Information Report (F.I.R) in Tilakdhari Vs. Jai Prakash Singh and another. The court ruled that the complainant’s complaint was dismissed at pre-cognizance stage, and the Magistrate’s jurisdiction to hear the case was deemed to be impaired. The Magistrate’s procedure was also questioned, with relevant provisions defining the Magistrate Court’s jurisdiction under Section 156(3) of the Act.
Information was revealing a cognizable offence when presented to a police station officer who satisfies the requirements of Section 154(1) of the Code, thus the officer was left with no choice but to enter the substance of the information in the prescribed form, which entails registering a case based on the information.
ISSUES-
Complainant’s complaint was dismissed at pre-cognizance stage, and the Magistrate’s jurisdiction to hear the case was deemed to be impaired.
JUDGEMENT-
Therefore, it is apparent that any Judicial Magistrate may order an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code before taking cognizance of the offence. As he was not taking cognizance of any offence therein, he is not required to examine the complainant under oath if he does so. The Magistrate has the authority to order the police to file a FIR in order to allow them to begin an investigation. It is not against the law to do this. After all, as stated in Section 154 of the Code, the registration of a FIR merely entails the act of recording the substance of the information relevant to the occurrence of the cognizable offence in a book maintained by the officer-in-charge of the police station.
The officer-in-charge of the police station is required to file the FIR regarding the cognizable offence disclosed by the complainant even if the Magistrate does not expressly direct investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code that a FIR should be registered because only then can that police officer take additional steps outlined in Chapter XII of the Code.
In order to determine whether two or more acts comprise the same transaction, no universally applicable rule can be enunciated. A case’s circumstances should be used to infer such factors as proximity to time, unity or proximity of place, continuity of action, and commonality of purpose or design.
Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the officer in charge of a police station has no choice but to enter the substance of any information disclosing a cognizable offence in the prescribed form, that is, to register a case based on the information, if it satisfies the requirements of Section 154(1) of the Code.
WRITTEN BY Priyanka Davar AN INTERN UNDER LEGAL VIDHIYA.
0 Comments