LAIJI MUAURYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision against the order dated 10.9.1993 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow rejecting the application of the revisionist under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned Additional Government Advocate who agree that this revision may be disposed of finally at this stage. According to the learned counsel for the revisionist the revisionist gave a telegram to the Station Officer, Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow on 5th September, 1993 at 9.45 P.M. stating therein the occurrence and praying for registration of a First Information Report. The above telegram wasalso sent to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow and the Home Secretary, U.P. Government, Lucknow on the above date and time. As no First Information Report was registered by the police, the revisionist moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On this application the learned Magistrate called for a report from the police of Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow for which the police requested for some time for investigation. When the revisionist prayed to the learned Magistrate to order the police to register the First Information Report, the learned Magistrate dismissed the application.

(2.) A perusal of Sections 154 and 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure win reveal that under Section 154 when an information relating to commission of a cognizable offence is given to an officer in charge of the police station it shall be reduced in writing and the substance thereof has to be entered in a book prescribe in this behalf. A copy of such information is to be given to the person who has given the information. Therefore a statutory duty is cast under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the police authorities to register a case when an information is given to them about the commission of an offence. In the present case the telegram, contained in annexure2, was given to the Station Officer, Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow. A Perusal of this telegram shows that a cognizable offence is alleged to have been committed and it is prayed that a First Information Report be registered and further proceedings be also done. When such an information was given by the revisionist to the police of Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow, then it was the duty of the police to lodge the First Information Report. Unless the First Information Report is lodged in accordance with the provisions of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure no investigation can be made by the police under Section 156, Cr. P .C. No other provision could be referred to by the learned counsel for the State to show that without lodging the First Information Report the police has power to investigate the case. Therefore, in view of the facts on record and the provisions of law applicable, it is clear that the police cannot investigate a case unless a First Information Report under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is lodged. If an information has been given to the police of a cognizable offence it is the statutory duty of the police authorities to lodge a First Information Report. They cannot refuse to lodge the First Information Report under the above provisions.

(3.) The learned Magistrate should have considered these provisions. The learned Magistrate in his impugned order has not dealt with these provisions. He merely mentioned in his order that the applicant did not want to wait for the Police enquiry and wanted that his application be disposed of that day and without proper enquiry from the police he did not find sufficient ground to allow the application. This order of the learned Magistrate cannot be sustained because it was the duty of the Magistrate to see as to whether the investigation of the case has been carrying on before lodging of the First Information Report. As the First Information Report was not lodged by the police and the enquiry was being made without lodging the First Information Report, there was no need for the Magistrate to wait for the police Report.