Magistrate Can 'Monitor' An Investigation In Exercise Of Power U/S 156(3) CrPC: Allahabad High Court

Update: 2022-01-23 05:06 GMT
story

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Magistrate has the power to monitor investigation in the exercise of his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.The Bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma observed thus while referring to Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage, (2016) 6 SCC 277, wherein it was explicitly...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Magistrate has the power to monitor investigation in the exercise of his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

The Bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma observed thus while referring to Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage, (2016) 6 SCC 277, wherein it was explicitly observed that a person aggrieved with the way investigation being done in a matter, can move an application before the Magistrate under section 156 (3) CrPC as the Magistrate is empowered to even monitor an investigation under the said provision

Significantly, in the Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe case, the Apex Court had relied upon the ruling of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409, wherein it was held that if a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or having been registered, proper investigation is not being done, then the remedy of the aggrieved person is not to go to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C

The case in brief

Essentially, the petition before the High Court was filed seeking direction to the respondent authorities to conclude the fair investigation in a criminal case under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. The petitioner had moved the Court aggrieved by the manner of the investigation being done against the private respondents.

The counsel for the petitioner alleged before the Court that the police is acting in collusion with the accused persons and as yet neither the accused persons have been arrested nor any charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons. 

While asking the petitioner to approach the court of the magistrate, the Court also referred to the cases of T.C. Thangaraj vs. V. Engammal, (2011) 12 SCC 328 and M.Subramaniam and another Vs. S.Janaki and another, 2020 SCC online S.C. 341 to conclude that Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation.

"...it includes the power to order registration of an FIR and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police," the Court quoted the Apex Court's ruling in the case of M. Subramaniam while disposing of the plea.
Case title - Satyaprakash v. State Of U.P And 6 Others
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 20

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Tags:    

Similar News