RAM SWAROOP AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Ram Swaroop And Others
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Present petition is filed challenging the order
dated 16.04.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Udham Singh Nagar whereby learned Magistrate, was
pleased to summon the accused/petitioners for the
offences punishable under Section 6 of the Dowry
(2.) Undisputedly, petitioners are resident of District
Bulandsahar beyond the territorial jurisdiction of
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Bank of Oman Vs. Barakara Abdul Aziz and another, 2013 2 SCC 488 has held as under :-
"8. We find no error in the view taken by the
High Court that the C.J.M. Ahmednagar had not
carried out any enquiry or ordered investigation
as contemplated under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C.
before issuing the process, considering the fact
that the respondent is a resident of District
Dakshin Kannada, which does not fall within the
jurisdiction of the C.J.M. Ahmednagar. It was,
therefore, incumbent upon him to carry out an
enquiry or order investigation as contemplated
under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. before issuing the
9. The duty of a Magistrate receiving a
complaint is set out in Section 202 of the Cr.P.C.
and there is an obligation on the Magistrate to
find out if there is any matter which calls for
investigation by a criminal court. The scope of
enquiry under this Section is restricted only to
find out the truth or otherwise of the allegations
made in the complaint in order to determine
whether process has to be issued or not.
Investigation under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. is
different from the investigation contemplated in
Section 156 as it is only for holding the Magistrate
to decide whether or not there is sufficient
grounds for him to proceed further. The scope of
enquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. is,
therefore, limited to the ascertainment of truth or
falsehood of the allegations made in the
(i)on the materials placed by the
complainant before the Court
(ii) for the limited purpose of finding
out whether a prima facie case for issue of
process has been made our; and
(iii) for deciding the question purely
from the point of view of the complainant
without at all adverting to any defence that
the accused may have.
10. Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. was amended by the
Cr.P.C. (Amendment Act 2005) and the following
words were inserted:
"and shall, in a case where the accused is
residing at a place beyond the area in whichhe
(3.) The notes on clauses for the abovementioned amendment read as follow:
"False complaints are filed against
persons residing at far off places simply to
harass them. In order to see that the
innocent persons are not harassed by
unscrupulous persons, this clause seeks to
amend subsection (1) of Section 202 to make
it obligatory upon the Magistrate that before
summoning the accused residing beyond his
jurisdiction he shall enquire into the case
himself or direct investigation to be made by
a police officer or by such other person as he
thinks fit, for finding out whether or not
there was sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused."
The amendment has come into force w.e.f.
23.6.2006 vide notification No.S.O.923 (E) dt.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.