Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.22 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957
Guruduth Prabhu And Ors. vs M.S. Krishna Bhat And Ors. on 18 February, 1999
3.2 It was further submitted, at bar, by Sh.Suraj Bhan - Adv. that the matter
is his personal dispute. The complainant is his son and an employee of Delhi
District Courts. Counsel is a retired judicial officer, who is being victimised
by the tenants in collusion with various public authorities.
4 I have heard the ld. Counsel and perused the complaint, documents
furnished and the status report. There is no dispute with the preposition of
law that on the basis of information disclosed, if a cognizable offence is made
out FIR ought to be registered. However, before issuance of direction for
registration of FIR or for conducting investigation u/sec.156 (3) Cr.P.C.; it is
incumbent upon the court to look into the allegations and find out if the
allegations constitute any cognizable offence to have been committed. A
Division Bench of the Karnantaka High court, in the decision reported as
1999 Cri LJ 3909 Guruduth Prabhu and Ors. Vs. Krishna Bhat and Ors.
observed as under:
"If every complaint filed u/sec.200 Cr.P.C. is referred to the Police
u/sec.156 (3) without application of mind about the disclosure of an
offence, there is every likelihood of unscrupulous complainants, in
order to harass the alleged accused named by them in their
Page 5 of page 10
6
complaints, making bald allegations just to see that the alleged
accused are harassed by the police, who have no other go except to
investigate as ordered by the Magistrate. Therefore, it is mandatory
for the Magistrate to apply his mind to the allegations made in the
complaint and in only cases which disclose an offence, the Magistrate
gets jurisdiction to order an investigation by the police."