ensure that the investigation reaches logical end.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 660 OF 2022
Nitin Shivdas Satpute
Age 41 Years, Occupation  Service;
R/o Motinagar, Amravati, Tahsil and
District Amravati.
 
  PETITIONER
V E R S U S
1. The State of Maharashtra
through the Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Murtizapur, Tahsil
Murtizapur, District Akola.
 
2. Santosh Madhavrao Thakre
Age 58 Years, Occupation  Service;
Office of the Principal, Shri Gadge
Maharaj Mahavidyalaya, Murtizapur,
Tahsil Murtizapur, District Akola.  RESPONDENTS
Mr. S. M. Vaishnav, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. A. R. Chutke, APP for Respondent No.1/State.
None for the Respondent No.2.
 CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE, J.
 DATE : DECEMBER 22, 2023.16. Before I part with the Judgment, I deem it appropriate to
comment upon the scope of Section 155 of the Code, which reads as under :
155. Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such
cases  
(1) When information is given to an officer in charge of a police
station of the commission within the limits of such station of a noncognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance
of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as
the State Government may prescribe in this behalf, and refer the
informant to the Magistrate.
7/10 Judg.4.wp.660.2022.odt
(2) No police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without
the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the
case for trial.
(3) Any police officer receiving such order may exercise the same
powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest
without warrant)as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise
in a cognizable case.
(4) Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one
is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case,
notwithstanding that the other offences are non-cognizable.
Sub-section (1) of Section 155 provides that when information is
given to the officer in charge of a police station of commission of noncognizable offence, he shall enter the substance of the information in a book
in the form prescribed by the State Government and shall refer the informant
to the Magistrate.
Sub-section (2) of Section 155 provides that no Police Officer
shall investigate non-cognizable case without the order of a jurisdictional
Magistrate.
17. The experience shows that the Investigating Officer would seldom
approach the jurisdictional Magistrate and seek permission to investigate a
non-cognizable case. In fact, I havent come across a case where the
investigating officer has approached the Magistrate to seek such permission.
The usual practice is to leave the things to the informant to take the case
further, if he so desires.
8/10 Judg.4.wp.660.2022.odt
18. In my view, this mindset should change. In appropriate cases, the
Investigating Officer should approach the jurisdictional Magistrate and seek
permission to investigate the offence. The question may come in the mind of
the investigating officer as to what parameters should be applied to determine
an appropriate case. In my view, the appropriate case would be the one, in
which the non-cognizable offence has been committed, not in the spur of
moment but otherwise. In other words, the non-cognizable offence, which
occurred in the spur of moment may be a case where the investigating agency
need not approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to seek permission to
investigate the crime and will be justified in leaving the things to be carried
forward by of the informant, who may then file application under sub-section
(2) of Section 155 of the Code with the jurisdictional Magistrate and seek
direction against the investigating agnecy to investigate the offence. The
informant/complainant may also file complaint under Section 200 of the Code
in this regard. Thus, there are two options available to the
informant/complainant, one is to submit application under sub-section (2) of
Section 155 of the Code seeking direction to investigate the offence; and the
other is to file complaint under Section 190/200 of the Code.
19. In the present case, the Petitioner chose to file complaint under
Section 200 of the Code. The Investigating Officer concerned, for the reasons
best known to him, firstly did not register the offence under Section 294 of
Indian Penal Code; and secondly, did not seek permission of the jurisdictional
Magistrate to investigate the offence.
20. The report of Superintendent of Police concerned was, therefore,
sought in this regard. The report is received, which indicates that the
9/10 Judg.4.wp.660.2022.odt
Investigating Officer concerned has committed error in processing the
information received. This error surfaced only because the Superintendent of
Police was requested to intervene. There must be many such cases where
Investigating Officer ought to seek permission to investigate the offence, but
for want of guidelines/directions, the necessary steps are being not taken.
21. Considering the ambiguous status, I deem it necessary to issue
directions to the Director General of Police, State of Maharashtra, Mumbai to
issue Circular/Notification stating therein that in appropriate cases (which
should be made identifiable), the investigating agency should approach the
jurisdictional Magistrate under sub-section (2) of Section 155 of the Code,
seeking permission to investigate the non-cognizable offence. The
investigating officer should be mindful of the fact that even the noncognizable offences are punishable, and therefore, in appropriate cases, he is
duty-bound to investigate even such offences and ensure that the investigation
reaches logical end.