SATISH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Firdos Mirza, Adv. for the applicant, Mr.A.S.Parihar, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 and Mr.R.D.Bhuibhar, Adv. for respondent no.2.

(2.) By this application u/s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 2nd February, 2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kelapur, Distt. Yavatmal in Criminal Complaint Case No.14 of 2011. The learned J.M.F.C. appears to have directed police to conduct investigation in view of power u/s. 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) Mr.R.D.Bhuibhar, Adv. for respondent no.2 opposed the application and submitted that the learned Magistrate was not obliged to record verification of the complainant at pre- cognizance stage of the proceedings. The learned Magistrate is required to satisfy himself about sufficiency of grounds to proceed further and for that purpose, he may direct police to investigate and wait for police report. When such an order u/s. 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is passed, the order enables police to record the FIR and to investigate into the allegations or accusations and then to submit report pursuant to investigation done by the police. It may be a report u/s. 169 or 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which enables the Magistrate concerned to pass an appropriate order to drop proceedings or to take cognizance of the offences. When a private complaint is filed, it is discretion of the learned Magistrate to direct police to investigate.