Magistrate can refer case to police or ask for evidence from complainant: HC

A magistrate has discretion to either refer a criminal complaint from a person to the police or ask the complainant to present more evidence in order to reach a conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana high court has said

A magistrate has discretion to either refer a criminal complaint from a person to the police or ask the complainant to present more evidence in order to reach a conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana high court has said.

As per claims of Gupta, he had a property dispute with co-sharers of a property. He sold a portion of his share and subsequently, co-sharers sold the remaining portion of land including his share, as per his claims. (Getty Images)

The high court bench of justice JS Bedi observed that no fault can be found with the magistrate having exercised one of the two options available to him.

The court was hearing a plea from Deepak Gupta from Faridabad who had sought quashing of January 2022 order passed by a judicial magistrate on a complaint filed by Gupta. In that order, the magistrate had asked him to lead preliminary evidence. As per claims of Gupta, he had a property dispute with co-sharers of a property. He sold a portion of his share and subsequently, co-sharers sold the remaining portion of land including his share, as per his claims.

He filed a complaint with the chief minister window and an inquiry conducted recommended registration of FIR against co-sharers. But local police did not take cognisance. Following this, he filed a criminal complaint with the area magistrate seeking registration of a criminal case. The magistrate called for an action-taken report from the police and declined the application for registration of FIR and instead asked him to lead preliminary evidence. It was this order, which he had challenged arguing that order is non-speaking as no reason has been given as to why the complaint was being treated like a complaint case.

It was argued that the magistrate ought to have passed the order for registration of a criminal case as recommended by an earlier probe report. The offence in question was made out despite the fact that the action-taken report (ATR) was to the contrary, it was submitted.

The bench observed that a magistrate has the discretion to decline the prayer of the complainant to refer the case to the police for the registration of the FIR and can treat the case like a private complaint and proceed to examine the complaint.

The court found that detailed enquiry by the police showed that the police had come to a categoric conclusion that it was a civil dispute. The argument that the order in question was a non-speaking one is “fallacious”. The magistrate has taken on record the ATR and has perused the same. It is, thereafter, that magistrate came to the conclusion that it was not a case for registration of an FIR, the court said, adding that merely because FIR was not ordered is not a declaration of the innocence of the co-sharers. The magistrate only chose to ask the complainant to get his statement recorded, which could possibly lead to a summoning of co-sharers, if the magistrate finds that the offence is made out, the court added dismissing the plea.