Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 174 (AP)

Dommeti Madhuri v. Dommeti Parameswara Rao

2006-02-13

GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

body2006
( 1 ) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 31-12-2004, passed in C. C. (SR) no. 1377 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the i Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, amalapuram, closing the complaint filed by the petitioner herein without issuing notice to her. ( 2 ) THE grievance of the petitioner is that she filed a private complaint against the respondents 1 to 3 herein for the alleged offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3,4 and 6 of the Dowry prohibition Act below the Court below. The learned Magistrate referred the same to the police under Section 156 (3) of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1973, and the police registered the same as a cash in Crime no. 41 of 2004 and investigated into. Subsequently, after completion of investigation, the police filed a final report before the Court below stating that it is a mistake of fact. A copy of the final report was also served on the petitioner. Based on the said final report, the Court below, without issuing any notice to be petitioner, closed the complaint. Hence, this criminal petition. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that a duty is cast upon the Court to serve a notice on the information under section 173 of Cr. P. C, before closing the case, but in the instant case, the learned magistrate without giving any notice, closed the complaint, basing on the final report furnished by the police. ( 4 ) HAVING regard to the fact this is a matter in between the complainant/petitioner herein and the Court, notice to respondents 1 to 3 is dispensed with and this petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. ( 5 ) IN identical circumstances, the Supreme court, in Union Public Service Commission v. S. Papaiah held that the Magistrate must give notice and opportunity of hearing to the informant before accepting final report and closing the case. Issuance of notice to the informant by the investigating agency is not a substitute for notice required to be given by the Magistrate. ( 6 ) IN the light of the said decision, this court has no hesitation to hold that the learned magistrate has erred in closing the case without issuing notice to the petitioner herein. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, the order, dt. ( 6 ) IN the light of the said decision, this court has no hesitation to hold that the learned magistrate has erred in closing the case without issuing notice to the petitioner herein. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, the order, dt. 31-12-2004, passed in C. C. (SR) No. 1377 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Judicial magistrate of first class, Amalapuram, is set aside and the learned Magistrate is directed to issue notice and opportunity to the petitioner to explain the circumstances, and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The criminal petition is accordingly allowed.