Court holds that once a complaint is taken up under Chapter XV and inquiry under Section 202 is conducted, the Magistrate cannot revert to the pre-cognizance stage for police investigation.
The Bombay High Court has quashed an FIR registered against a man in a land dispute case, holding that the Magistrate had committed a procedural illegality by directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure after having already taken cognizance of the complaint and proceeded under Chapter XV.
Justice Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, hearing a criminal application filed by Tansukhlal Pannalal Jain, said that once a Magistrate examines a private complaint under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C., the court cannot “revert back” to the pre-cognizance stage and order police investigation under Section 156(3).
The case arose from a private complaint filed in 2015 by the respondent, alleging cheating, forgery, criminal breach of trust and fabrication of a power of attorney in connection with a land development transaction. The complaint claimed that the accused had altered documents, manipulated mutation entries, and used a forged power of attorney to transfer land and execute a sale deed.
Initially, the Magistrate directed the complainant to lead evidence under Section 200. The complainant’s statement was recorded, and the court then called for a police report under Section 202. After the police submitted a report stating that no offence was made out, the Magistrate later passed an order under Section 156(3) directing the police to investigate the matter. Based on that order, Mumbra Police registered an FIR in 2017 under sections 420, 406, 465, 467 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The High Court held that this sequence was legally unsustainable. It noted that Section 156(3) applies at the pre-cognizance stage, while Section 202 operates after cognizance has been taken, only to determine whether there is sufficient ground to proceed. The court relied on Supreme Court rulings including Devarapally Lakshminarayana Reddy, National Bank of Oman, Madhao, Ramdev Food Products, and later decisions reaffirming the distinction between the two provisions.
The judgment emphasized that an inquiry under Section 202 is limited in scope and cannot be mixed with the broader police investigation contemplated under Section 156(3). It further held that an FIR registered on the basis of such an invalid order cannot be sustained.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed both the Magistrate’s order dated 1 October 2016 and the FIR registered pursuant to it. However, the court remanded the matter back to the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Thane, to consider the police report already submitted under Section 202 and decide the complaint afresh in accordance with law.
The court also directed that the matter, pending since 2015, be taken up expeditiously.
Bottom Line :
A Magistrate cannot revert to the pre-cognizance stage and direct investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. once cognizance has been taken under Chapter XV and inquiry/investigation under Section 202 has been conducted.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 156(3), 200, 202, 203, 204, 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Sections 420, 406, 465, 467, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Tansukhlal Pannalal Jain v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc id # 2976671
