S.D.BAJAJ, J. - (1.) WIFE Kiran Bala filed against her husband Madan Mohan, his parents, two sisters named Sushma and Santosh husband of Santosh named Ashok Kumar and Dhani Ram, father of Ashok Kumar, complainant. Annexure P. 2 on 16th April, 1987, urging criminal breach of trust of her dowry articles and cruelty towards her by the husband and his relations aforesaid under sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) LEARNED trial court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class Ludhiana, made therein the following order on 25.4.1987 :- Present : Complainant in person. The complaint is directed to be sent to S.H.O. Police Station Division No. 3, Ludhiana, under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of a case and for investigation. Sd/- J.M.I.C. Ludhianan. 25.4.1987" All the six petitioners (excluding the husband) arrayed as co-accused in the complaint, have filed Criminal Misc. No. 7145-M of 1987 for quashing the complaint aforesaid on the grounds that allegations obtaining therein do not disclose the commission of criminal offence, by anyone from amongst them and the learned trial court did not have the jurisdiction to order registration of a case against them by the police. I have heard Shri Sarwan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner, Shri A. S. Kalra, Advocate, for respondent No. 2 and have carefully perused the relevant record.
(3.) THE first and foremost point going to the root of the case is, could the learned trial court vide its order dated 5th April, 1987 (reproduced order registration of a case by the police against the petitioners. Conflicting views in this regard have been expressed by different Hon'ble Judges of this Court at intervals. Initially the matter came to be examined by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.P.S. Sandhu (as his lordship then was) in Jaggar A Singh v. The State of Haryana, 1984(2) Chandigarh Law Reporter 536. The relevant observations read, "The main contention raised by Mr. D. S. Bali, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the Magistrate was not competent under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to order the registration of a case against the petitioner. He was only empowered to order investigation of the case under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned counsel therefore prays that this order and the consequent registration of case against the petitioner are illegal in view of the provisions of section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr. A. K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the State of Haryana, has very fairly conceded that the Magistrate was certainly not competent to order the registration of a case in exercise of the powers under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was only competent to send the complaint to the police for investigation. Consequently I quash order Annexure P/2/A, first information report No. 361 dated 15th September, 1979, Annexure P/l, and all other proceedings in consequence of the registration of the case. Similar view was expressed by my learned brother S. S. Sodhi, J. in Rattan Amol Singh and another v. State of Punjab and another, 1988(2) Recent Criminal Reports 600. Relevant observations read. "The matter here arises from a complaint filed against the petitioner by Preetinder Kaur under sections 405 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial magistrate, after recording some evidence of the respondent Preetinder Kaur, came to the finding that he was satisfied that a prima facie case against the respondents under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code existed and then proceeded thereafter to send the complaint to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Sangrur, under section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for the registration of a case against all the accused and then to investigate it. Such an order is clearly not envisaged under section 156 of the Code. Under sub-section (3) thereof, all, that the Magistrate is empowered to do is to order an investigation and no more. This being so, the impugned order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the registration of the case against the respondent and the registration of the case by the police as a consequence thereof are hereby quashed." ;