- (1.) THE present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') has been directed against orders dated 11.02.2012 and 07.04.2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra (Annexures P1 & P2 respectively) whereby the report from the SHO, Police Station Thanesar has been called after recording the preliminary evidence in complaint Krishan Lal Versus Raj Bala and others (Annexure P3) for offence under Sections 307, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').
(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of the present petition are that Krishan Lal petitioner has filed a private complaint on 20.10.2010 against Raj Bala and others (respondents No.3 to 5 herein) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 506 read with Section 34 IPC.
(3.) THE learned trial Court examined as many as 7 witnesses namely Krishan Lal complainant CW1, Devi Chand son of Sampuran Singh CW2, Dr. Anil Malik CW3, Surinder Singh Sub Inspector CW4, Rajbir Singh ASI CW5, Tej Pal son of Sadhu Ram CW6 and Bhupinder Singh CW7 and the complainant closed his preliminary evidence on 11.02.2012. On that date itself, the learned Magistrate passed the following order: - "One CW Bhupinder is present and recorded in preliminary evidence. Thereafter, complainant closed preliminary evidence. Taking into account the allegations made in the complaint, I deem it justify to get investigate report through police agency under section 202 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, copy of this order along with copy of complaint and affidavit etc. be sent to concerned SHO with the direction to investigate this case and would submit his report on or before 7.4.2012." Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the complaint and recorded evidence during preliminary inquiry, the Magistrate cannot issue direction to the police to investigate the case in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 202 of the Code. It is further submitted that the order dated 11.02.2012 calling upon the SHO, Police Station Thanesar to investigate the case and submit a report under Section 202 of the Code is in complete violation of the procedure prescribed in Section 202 of the Code and liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he has relied upon Jaswant Ram vs. State of Punjab, 1999 1 RCR(Cri) 636; Puran Singh vs. Bachan Singh and Others,1978 6 CrLR 4; Prem Hazara vs. Satinder Singh Grewal,1985 2 RCR(Cri) 256(Delhi High Court );and Ishwar Singh vs. Baga Ram, 2007 3 CriCC 267 .;