Mahesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 5388 ALL

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 5388 ALL
Judgement Date : 13 June, 2019

Allahabad High Court

Mahesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 13 June, 2019

Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22604 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Mahesh Yadav
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri Harish Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This application has been given under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned order dated 27.05.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad in Application No.68 of 2019, under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., Police Station Massorie, District-Ghaziabad by which, learned Magistrate has directed the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to be registered as Complaint Case.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that by the application of the applicant, a cognizable offence is made out and, therefore, learned Magistrate committed illegality in directing the same to be registered as complaint case. The nature of offence is such that it requires an investigation by the police.

On being asked about the status of the abducted child, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that abducted child has already been recovered.

It is pertinent to mention that settled law on the point is that when an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is given, the Magistrate has three options, he can either reject the application not finding the contents of the application to be believable or not disclosing the cognizable offence or if cognizable offence is being disclosed, the Magistrate can either direct the police to register the F.I.R. and investigate the matter or the Magistrate can himself take cognizance to register complaint case.

The learned Magistrate by passing the impugned order has exercised the discretion directing the application to be registered as compliant case. No reason has been disclosed why there is a need of investigation by the police when the abducted child has already been recovered. In view of this, I find no valid reason for interference with the impugned order.

Accordingly, application is dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.6.2019

RCT/-