DHARAM PAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) In this case, initially the FIR was lodged as a non-cognizable report (NCR) at police station Phoolpur, District Allahabad under sections 323 and 504 IPC on 8.7.1999 at 5 pm about an incident dated 8.7.1999. The allegations in the NCR lodged by Jagannath were that as the cattle of the accused had entered his field, when his wife and son tried to drive the animals out of the field, there was an exchange of hot words with the applicants who beat Devkali and Kamlesh with lathies and dandas, and caused injuries on the head of Devkali and arms and fingers of Kamlesh. Subsequently, it appears that on the basis of the medical report the case was converted to one under sections 323, 324 f arid 325 IPC by the investigating officer and subsequently he even added section 308 IPC when he submitted the charge-sheet on 12.10.1999.

(3.) The main contention of the learned counsel of the applicants was that the investigation by the investigating officer was unauthorized as it was a non-cognizable case and in view of section 155(2) Cr. P.C the investigation could not have been initiated in the case without any order of a Magistrate who had power to try or commit the case for trial. Learned counsel for the applicants also relied on paragraph 34 of State of Haryana Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) 335: AIR 1992 SC 604. The said passage read as follows: