- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. Heard Sri S. L. Kesharwani, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the AGA.
(2.) IT is very unfortunate that for this very trifle matter third petition has been filed before me. The facts of the case are that the petitioner moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur to register the case under Section 156 (3), Crpc against the police officers mentioned in the application. The substance of the allegation is that the petitioner purchased the Maruti Van which was taken away by the opposite parties 3 and from the house of the petitioner on 22-6-99. On the request of the petitioner to return the Maruti Van, bribe of Rs. 25, (X)0 was demanded. On refusal by the petitioner, the recovery of Maruti Van has been shown alleging that it was used for commission of Crime No. 72 of 1999 under Section 392, IPC. The petitioner, therefore, moved an application under Section 156 (3), Crpc before CJM, Rampur with request that the police that the case be registered and investigated. On this application the learned CJM, Rampur ordered that the petitioner may send an application to the S. R Rampur for taking action against the Police Officers. This order was passed on 13-7-99, against which the petitioner filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 3493of 1999, under Section 482, Crpc before me and the order was quashed on 25-8-99 and the CJM was directed to pass an appropriate order under Section 156 (3), Crpc. After the order of this Court was produced before the CJM, he ordered the petitioner to file affidavits in support of the allegations. The petitioner again challenged that order in Criminal Misc. Application No. 4836 of 1999 on the ground that the learned CJM has started the procedure of complaint case and once the procedure of complain t case is adopted and the cognizance is taken, the Magistrate will not be able to pass an order under Section 156 (3), Crpc. The order was quashed by me on 6-10-99 and the Magistrate was directed to pass an order in accordance with the provisions of Section 156 (3), Crpc. After this order was produced before the Magistrate he passed a detailed order on 25-10-99 and considered the al legations in detail and allowed i he applica tion under Section 156 (3 ). Crpc in pan only to the extent that the case be registered and investigation he made regarding the circumstances in which the Maruti Van was recovered. This order has been challenged in this petition.
(3.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, 1 am of the view that the learned Magistrate is not at all aware regarding scope of Section 156 (3), Crpc or he is under the influence of the Police Officers against whom the application has been moved and had passed repeatedly the arbitrary orders resulting the filing of repeated petitions by the petitioner. Lei a copy of this order be, therefore, sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Rampur who will make enquiry and if considers proper may report the mailer to the Inspecting Judge for necessary action against the CJM. The order passed by (he learned CJM, Rampur dated 25-f 0-99 is also quashed and the CJM is again directed lo pass order under Section 156 (3), Crpc within the scope of this section in place of enquiring the matter regarding correctness of the allegations himself.;