The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that a Magistrate's prima facie observation while directing the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) does not equate to taking cognizance of the offence. This distinction is crucial as it determines the procedural steps the Magistrate may subsequently follow.
In the present case, the petitioner alleged assault by a police officer and filed a private complaint. The Magistrate, after reviewing the complaint, directed the police to register an FIR and investigate the matter. The Sessions Court later quashed the proceedings initiated under Section 156(3), concluding that the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence. However, the Sessions Court did not quash the FIR itself. The petitioner then approached the High Court, challenging the Sessions Court's decision.
Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke, while hearing the matter, emphasized that when a Magistrate directs the registration of an FIR under Section 156(3), it is a pre-cognizance stage. At this stage, the Magistrate is not required to record statements of the complainant or witnesses, nor initiate an inquiry under Sections 200 or 202 of the CrPC. The Magistrate's role is limited to determining whether the complaint discloses a cognizable offence and, if so, directing the police to investigate. Only after the investigation, if a charge sheet is filed, does the Magistrate take cognizance of the offence and proceed under Chapter XV of the CrPC.
The High Court noted that in the present case, the Magistrate had merely recorded that a prima facie cognizable offence was made out and directed the police to register the FIR and investigate. No statements of the complainant or witnesses were recorded, nor was any inquiry initiated under Sections 200 or 202. Therefore, the Magistrate had not taken cognizance but had exercised jurisdiction under Section 156(3) appropriately.
This judgment reaffirms the legal position that directing an investigation under Section 156(3) does not amount to taking cognizance of an offence. It underscores the procedural distinction between the pre-cognizance and post-cognizance stages in criminal proceedings.
 CrPC: Prima Facie Satisfaction Does Not Amount to Cognizance){kind=link}
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.