LexSANJAY BANSAL AND ANR. versus JAWAHARLAL VATS AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
....--'I'
SANJA Y BANSAL AND ANR.
A
v.
JAW AHARLAL VATS AND ORS.
OCTOBER 22, 2007
[DR.ARIJITPASAYAT ANDLOKESHWARSINGHPANTA,JJ.] B
,.
...
Constitution of India, I 950:
Art. 226-Son of Respondent No. I sustained fire-arm injuries- c
Case registered under s. 307 JPC-10. submitted final report excluding
accused-Appellants of the offence on basis of alibi claimed by them-
Respondent No. I filed writ petition before High Court praying for
direction to investigating agency to proceed in the case in a "fair and
proper" manner-High Court directed Respondent No. I to file protest D
,....
petition before Trial Magistrate and kept the writ petition pending/or
order of the Magistrate-Correctness of-Held, not correct-High
Court could not have directed Respondent No. I to lodge the protest
petition-It was for the informant to do so if he intended to do so-
High Court further could not have kept the matter pending and E
indicated its anxiety to know the order passed by the Magistrate-It
is clearly indicative of the fact that the High Court wanted the rejection
of the final report though it was not spec~fically spelt out-Jn the
circumstances, order passed by High Court and the consequential order
,,
passed by Magistrate are set aside-Protest petition, ({filed, shall be
. )
considered by the Magistrate in accordance with law uninfluenced by F
any observation made by High Court-Penal Code, I860-s.307-
Code of Criminal Procedure, I973-ss. I56, I69, I73 & I90.
The son of Respondent No.1 sustained fire-arm injuries at the
hands of some miscreants. A case was registered under Section 307 G
i>·
IPC. The Investigating Officer submitted final report excluding the
"
accused-Appellants of the offence on the basis of alibi claimed by
them. Respondent No.1 filed writ petition before High Court praying
for a direction to the investigating agency to proceed in the case in
591
H
~.
f-
592
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2007] 11 S.C.R.
,__
~ t-
A a "fair and proper" manner. High Court directed Respondent No.1
to file protest petition before the Trial Magistrate and kept the writ
~
peti~ion pending for order of the Magistrate.
Appellant contended before this Court that the directions given
B by High Court could not be sustained since it indirectly directed
rejection of the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer
.J~
"·
which was evident from the fact that the High Court exp~essed its
•
.,
I
anxiety to know the order passed by the Magistrate and kept the
writ petition pending for order of the Magistrate. It was submitted
c
that in view of the clear indication of view made by the High Court,
the Trial Magistrate was bound to be influenced.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
... ~
''
HELD: 1.1. When a report forwarded by the police to the
D
Magistrate under Section 173(2)(i) CrPC is placed before him
several situations arise. The report may conclude that an offence
'"'
appears to have been committed by a particular person or persons
and in such a case, the Magistrate may either (1) accept the report
and take cognizance of the offence and issue process, or (2) may
E
disagree with the report and drop the proceeding, or (3) may direct
further investigation under Section 156(3) and require the police to
make a further report. The report may on the other hand state that
according to the police, no offence appears to have been committed.
When such a report is placed before the Magistrate he has~again
option of adopting one of the three courses open i.e., (1) he may accept
~ j-
F the report and drop the proceeding; or (2) he may disagree with the
report and take the view that there is sufficient ground for further
proceeding, take cognizance of the offence and issue process; or (3)
he may direct further investigation to be made by the police under
Section 156(3). The position is, therefore, now well~settled that upon
G receipt of a police report under Section 173(2) a Magistrate is
entitled to take cognizance of an offence under Section 190(1 )(b) of
....
>
"
the Code even if the police report is to the effect that no case is made
)
out against the accused. [Para 8] [598-C, D, E, F, G]
H
1.2. The Magistrate can take into account the statements of the
I j
SANJA YBANSAL v. JAW AHARLAL VATS
593
~
witnesses examined by the police during the investigation and take A
cognizance of the offence complained of and order the issue of
process to the accused. Section 190(1)(Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.