AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Subramania Iyer, J.—The complainant in C. C. No. 168/1950'' on the file of the Second Class Magistrate''s Court Sherthallai, seeks revision of the order passed by the Court below dismissing his complaint u/s 201, Travancore Criminal P. C., corresponding to Section 203 of the Indian Code.
On presentation of the complaint, the Magistrate took the statement of the complainant on path and directed an investigation into the subject-matter of the complaint by a police officer. On receipt of the said police officer''s report, the Magistrate considered the whole matter and dismissed the complaint as, in his judgment, there was not sufficient ground for proceeding therewith, recording his reasons for so doing.
The only point raised by the petitioner before me is that after receipt of the police report, no opportunity was given to the complainant to substantiate his complaint : Reliance is placed upon Criminal Circular No. 18/1066 (Travancore) which provides as follows:
It is ordered that in cases brought on Station House Registers, but referred by the Police as false or Unproved, Magistrates to whom such references are made shall give notice to the complainants, if any, and hear them before according permission for striking off the cases from the Registers.
This circular has reference to a different class of cases altogether that is to say, it refers to a case where the complaint is made to the police and they refer the complaint as false or Unproved to the court, in which case, the Circular enjoins upon the Magistrate an obligation to issue notice to the complainants & to hear them before according permission to the police for striking off the case from the Register. It has no application to the case of a complaint presented to a Magistrate by the complainant, in which case, the applicatory provision is Section 201 , Travancore Criminal P. C. under which the Magistrate acted in this case. Under that section, the Magistrate is entitled to dismiss a complaint upon consideration of the sworn statement, if any, of the complainant as also of the investigation directed by him and it is not obligatory upon him to give an opportunity to the complainant to show that the police report is wrong. See - ''Nalliappa Pillai v. Palaniandi Ambalam'' AIR 1949 Mad 232 (A).
The revision petition is, therefore, devoid of merit and should be dismissed.