Complaint U/s. 156(3) CrPC Suppressed Material Fact That Police Already Conducted Detailed Enquiry & Submitted Its Report: Madhya Pradesh HC Quashes Complaint
The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. after observing that the said complaint suppressed the material fact that the police already conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted its report.
The Court set aside the impugned Order passed by the Judicial Magistrate observing that the Complainant failed to approach the Court with clean hands, as material facts related to a prior police inquiry and its report were suppressed. The Court held that the proceedings initiated under Section 156(3) of the CrPC were an abuse of the process of law.
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi held, “In a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court has ample power to restrain the abuse of process of law and as such this Court is of the opinion that the complaint filed by the respondent is nothing but a misuse of the forum only to harass the petitioners and this amounts to abuse of process of law.”
Advocate Sankalp Kochar appeared for the Petitioners, while Panel Lawyer Shraddha Tiwari represented the Respondents.
The Complainant alleged that he was badly beaten by the Petitioners. The father of the Complainant filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission (Commission). The Commission instructed the Superintendent of Police to investigate the matter.
The Police submitted its report stating that the incident was accidental, with no injuries caused by the Petitioners. It further stated that the allegations of loot and dacoity were false and appeared to be motivated by personal enmity.
Despite the police report, the Complainant filed a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate, seeking directions to register an FIR against the Petitioners. The Magistrate passed an order directing the police to register an FIR, which was challenged in the Writ Petition.
The High Court found that the Complainant had suppressed material facts regarding the police inquiry and submitted a false affidavit before the Magistrate. The Bench noted that the complainant “suppressed the very material information” which influenced the Magistrate’s decision to direct the registration of an FIR.
The Bench observed that “it is clear that the respondent while approaching the Judicial Magistrate First Class by filing a complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. has suppressed the material fact that the police has already conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted its report. On the contrary, the complainant has made a false statement in the affidavit that the police has not done anything on the complaint and therefore the victim had no other alternative forum but to approach the court.”
“It is expected from a litigant to approach the court with all bonafides and without any ill-motive. The judicial forum are not available for harassing the person, but it is available to protect the right of the parties and therefore it is expected that all the correct facts should be placed before the court,” the Court observed.
Consequently, the Court held, “The impugned order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hanumana, District Rewa is hereby set aside and in consequence thereof, the impugned complaint filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is also quashed. However, there shall be order as to costs.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.
Cause Title: Brijendra Kumar Patel & Ors v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate Sankalp Kochar
Respondents: Panel Lawyer Shraddha Tiwari; Advocate Utkarsh Agrawal
