Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Mr. B.P. Tripathy vs State Of U.P on 28 August, 2020

Author: B.R. Sarangi

Bench: B.R. Sarangi

                                   CRLMP No. 894 of 2020




02.   28.08.2020         Heard Mr. S.K. Padhy, learned counsel for the petitioner
                   and Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Addl. Government Advocate
                   appearing for the State opposite parties, and perused the
                   record.
                         The petitioner files this application seeking direction to
                   the opposite party no. 4 to cause proper investigation into
                   Jankia P.S. Case No. 87 of 2020.
                         Mr. B.P. Tripathy,, learned Addl. Government Advocate
                   appearing for the State, relying on the decisions of the
                   Supreme Court in the cases of Sakiri Vasu V. State of U.P.
                   reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 and Sudhir Bhaskar Rao
                   Tambe V. Hemant Yashwant Dhage reported in (2016) 6
                   SCC 277, submits that instead of moving the jurisdictional
                   Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., the petitioner has
                   unnecessarily rushed to this Court. He further submits that in
                   the aforesaid decision, the Supreme Court has made it clear
                   that when after registering the F.I.R., if no proper investigation
                   is made, it would be open to the aggrieved person to file an
                   application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. before the learned
                   jurisdictional Magistrate and if such an application under
                   Section 156(3) is filed before the learned Magistrate, he/she
                   can direct for a proper investigation.
                         In such background, learned counsel for the petitioner
                   submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to move
                   the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C.
                         Considering the submissions made, this Court, without
                   expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, grants
                   liberty to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional Magistrate
                                    2




       under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. within a period of two weeks. In
       the event, such an application is filed, the jurisdictional
       Magistrate would do well to proceed with the same in
       accordance with law.
             The CRLMP is accordingly disposed of.



                                         ....................................
                                          Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.

Alok 3