The Calcutta High Court held that a Magistrate cannot direct the police to conduct an “inquiry” under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and must instead undertake such an inquiry personally before deciding whether to order an investigation. The Court clarified that the statutory framework requires the Magistrate to apply judicial mind and independently assess the material placed before it rather than delegating this function to the police.
The ruling was delivered in the context of cases where Magistrates had directed the police to conduct inquiries and submit reports without first carrying out the exercise mandated under the law. The High Court examined the scope of Section 175(3), which replaces the earlier provision under the Code of Criminal Procedure, and emphasized that the term “inquiry” has a specific legal meaning within the framework of criminal procedure.
The Court explained that under the BNSS, an inquiry refers to a process that is to be conducted by a Magistrate or a court, and not by the police. It observed that directing the police to conduct such an inquiry would be contrary to the statutory scheme and would amount to a misuse of the provision. This is particularly significant in situations where the police have already declined to register a First Information Report, as allowing them to conduct an inquiry in such circumstances would defeat the purpose of judicial scrutiny.
The High Court highlighted that Section 175(3) introduces several safeguards aimed at ensuring that the power to direct investigation is exercised cautiously and not in a mechanical manner. These safeguards include the requirement of filing an affidavit along with the application, the need to first approach the police authorities, and the obligation on the Magistrate to consider the reasons given by the police for refusing to register an FIR. These procedural requirements are intended to prevent misuse of the criminal process and ensure that judicial intervention is based on a careful assessment of facts.
The Court further stated that before directing an investigation, the Magistrate must satisfy a twofold requirement. First, the Magistrate must determine whether the complaint discloses a cognizable offence. Second, the Magistrate must assess whether there are sufficient grounds to justify an investigation. This evaluation is essential because, while the disclosure of a cognizable offence may obligate the police to register an FIR, it does not automatically require that an investigation be conducted in every case.
The judgment emphasized that the role of the Magistrate is not merely procedural but involves a substantive application of judicial mind. The Magistrate must examine the complaint, the supporting material, and the response of the police before deciding whether to invoke the power to direct an investigation. Simply forwarding the matter to the police for inquiry without such assessment would be inconsistent with the legislative intent behind the provision.
In the cases before it, the High Court found that the Magistrates had mechanically directed the police to conduct inquiries and submit reports without undertaking the required evaluation. Such orders were held to be legally unsustainable as they failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 175(3). The Court observed that this approach effectively bypassed the safeguards built into the provision and undermined the role of judicial oversight.
As a result, the High Court set aside the orders passed by the Magistrates and remitted the matters back to them for fresh consideration. It directed that the Magistrates must examine the complaints in accordance with the statutory framework and apply their judicial mind before deciding whether an investigation should be ordered.
The ruling underscores the importance of maintaining the distinction between the functions of the judiciary and the police in criminal proceedings. It clarifies that while the police are responsible for investigation, the decision to direct such investigation under Section 175(3) must be preceded by a judicial inquiry conducted by the Magistrate. This ensures that the power to initiate criminal investigation is exercised in a controlled and accountable manner.
The judgment also reinforces the principle that judicial orders must be reasoned and based on an independent assessment of the material on record. By requiring Magistrates to conduct their own inquiry and evaluate the grounds for investigation, the law seeks to prevent arbitrary or routine directions for police action.
Overall, the Calcutta High Court’s decision establishes that a Magistrate cannot delegate the task of inquiry to the police under Section 175(3) of the BNSS and must instead undertake the necessary examination personally. It reiterates that the power to direct investigation must be exercised with due care and only after satisfying the statutory requirements, thereby ensuring that the criminal process is not misused and that judicial oversight remains effective.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.