Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 2601 (ALL)

Kant Raji Devi v. State of U. P.

2006-10-17

VINOD PRASAD

body2006
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vinod Prasad, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. 2. In this case the application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. was filed by the present revisionist regarding the murder of her daughter, namely, Savitri because of lust of dowry under Sections 304B, 498A and 3/4 D.P. Act. The said application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. has been rejected by CJ.M. Maharajganj vide his impugned order dated 14.7.2006. I have gone through the impugned order dated 14.7.2006 passed by C.J.M., Maharajganj in the aforesaid case No. 5796 of 2006 Smt. Kant Raji Devi v. Praveen Kumar and others. The impugned order is wholly illegal and has been passed without any reasoning. CJ.M. concerned has got no power to refuse registration and investigation of the case if the application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. filed before him discloses commission of cognizable offence. Section 156(3) relates with cognizable offence the investigation of, which is to be carried out by the police under Section 156(1), Cr.P.C. without fail. Moreover, Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. is incorporated under Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal. Procedure. It is incorporated to check high-handedness and arbitrary act of the police. This does not mean that the Magistrate should also start acting arbitrarily. In this case the application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. disclosed the commission of cognizable offence of dowry death, and therefore, it was the duty of the CJ.M. to direct the police to register the case and investigate the same. By not doing so CJ.M. Mahrajganj has committed miscarriage of justice. 3. In this view of the matter, this revision is allowed at the admission stage itself. The impugned order dated 14.7.2006 passed by CJ.M., Mahrajganj in Miscellaneous Case No. 5796 of 2006 Smt. Kant Raji Devi v. Praveen Kumar and others, under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. is set aside. CJ.M. Mahrajganj is directed to reconsider the application filed by the revisionist in accordance with law and decide the same within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it. With the aforesaid direction this revision is allowed finally. Revision Allowed. ———