words per minute
7
Currents_Affair_Acad
00:00
Speed
2. An application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the opposite party no. 4 alleging that his daughter had been married to the applicant no. 1 three years ago. She was being harassed for dowry and suddenly on 4.1.2001 the father of the girl heard that the applicants had murdered the girl and thrown her on the railway line. On this application the learned Magistrate passed an order dated 25.4.2001 directing the police to register and investigate the case. 3. A revision filed by the applicants against the order of the Magistrate has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 12, Allahabad by judgment dated 24.7.2001. 4. The applicants are relying upon a compromise entered into between the parties, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure 2 with the affidavit, in which girls side has admitted that the husband’s side is innocent and not guilty and certain other terms were agreed between the parties. 5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that by way of after thought this application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the father of the girl. A GENERAL PROBLEM 6. Orders under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. merely mean that an alleged cognizable offence should investigated. It should not normally be open to the accused to say before the revisional or the High Court that the allegation about a cognizable offence should not even be investigated. Thus interference by superior Courts with an order of a Magistrate U/s 156 (3) should normally be confined to cases in which there are some very exceptional circumstances. 7. However, the major problem faced by the accused persons in such cases is the apprehension of arrest pending investigation by the police, and more importantly, the apprehension about misuse by the police of this power of arrest. It is this apprehension which is causing the accused to file revisions and thereafter applications U/s 482 Cr.P.C. or writ petitions. Much of this litigation in superior Courts can be curtailed if every Magistrate while passing an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. also examines, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case, the advisability of including in his order an incidental direction as to whether the power of arrest by the police for the purpose of that investigation should be controlled by saying that the police will not make arrest for the purpose of investigation without a first obtaining an warrant for the arrest from the Magistrate. 8. The power to arrest without warrant in cognizable offences is no doubt conferred upon the police by section 41 1All] Sri Guru Pal Singh V. State of U.P. and another 83 Cr.P.C. {Only clause (a) of sub-section (1) of that section is relevant for the present case}. But that power has been subjected to the control and supervision of a Magistrate by virtue of Article 22 (2) of the Constitution of India and section 167 Cr.P.C. It is also well settled that arrest is part of investigation. It may be kept in mind that this investigation is under directions of a Magistrate and is thus slightly different from the normal investigation of a cognizable offence. Wherever a power to do something is conferred, all powers ancillary and incidental to achieving that purpose are necessarily implied. Thus the Magistrate while exercising his power of directing investigation can issue further incidental directions with regard to the investigation as above. 9. In those cases where such a restriction is