LALIT PANWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking quashing of the proceedings under Sec. 186 IPC initiated against him in Case No. 182/2007 pending before the learned A.C.J.M., Sojat City. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case, the S.H.O., P.S., Sojat City himself investigated and enquired into the allegations pertaining to an offence under Sec. 186 I.P.C. without seeking permission from the Court and thereupon proceeded to file a complaint against the petitioner in the Court, upon which the Court has taken cognizance without recording evidence. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the only evidence on the basis of which the proceedings have been undertaken against the petitioner are the statements recorded by the complainant who is S.H.O., without permission of the Court. Relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Deepak Arora & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan reported in : 2010(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 248, learned counsel submits that for non -cognizable offences, the police cannot investigate the matter without permission and direction of the Court as is enshrined in Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Thus, he submits that the proceedings against the petitioner are vitiated.

(2.) LEARNED PP opposes the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) THE provisions of Section 155 Cr.P.C., are very explicit in relation to the manner in which the proceedings are to be undertaken for non -cognizable offence. The Police Officers are not empowered to investigate the non -cognizable offences without the directions/order of the Magistrate. In the present case, no such direction of the learned Magistrate is available on the record. The S.H.O. himself initiated the complaint and thereafter recorded the statements of the witnesses and filed the complaint in the Court. Thus, obviously, the proceedings which were undertaken by the S.H.O. are in total contravention of Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. This Court in the case of Deepak Arora (supra) has expressed the view that for the offence under Sec. 186 IPC, which is a non -cognizable offence, without there being any direction or permission of the Magistrate, no investigation could have been done. Resultantly, the present misc. petition succeeds and the proceedings in the Complaint Case No. 182/2007 pending before the learned A.C.J.M., Sojat City against the petitioner for the offence under Sec. 186 IPC are hereby quashed.