Skip to main content

“The Procedure to Take Cognizance of a Private Complaint by Magistrates”

 “The Procedure to Take Cognizance of a Private Complaint by Magistrates”- By Yashika Soni

The Karnataka High Court has laid down the steps for Magistrates to take when they receive a private complaint under Sec. 200 of CrPC, 1973.

  1. "The cognizance taking procedure to be followed may be established as follows: I After the presentation of the complaint, the Magistrate must read the complaint and if he finds prima facie, the commission of an offence or offences is not disclosed, he can reject or dismiss the complaint," a single-judge bench led by Js. Sreenivas Harish Kumar said in an order dated July 22, 2021. However, the Magistrate should be cautious of dismissing a complaint based only on its content, because if the complaint is not adequately expressed, dismissal may result in injustice to the complainant. It's also conceivable that effective drafting creates the idea that an offence has occurred, which isn't always the case. As a result, if required, it is preferable to examine the complainant and witnesses.

  2. If the Magistrate concludes that there are sufficient grounds to proceed further after reading the complaint and examination of the witnesses (if they are present and their inquiry is necessary) under section 200 Cr.P.C., he shall take cognizance of the offence and issue process to the accused.

  3. If the Magistrate is not satisfied that there are sufficient materials to take cognizance after following the procedure set forth in Sec. 200, he may hold an inquiry himself or order a direct investigation as provided in S.202 of CrPC.

  4. If the Magistrate does not find prima facie materials of the commission of any offence after examination of the complainant and witnesses (if any), the case might be dismissed under S.203.

  5. Using the process outlined in Section 202 is not always required; it may only be used in the conditions outlined in Section 202. That is, even after the stage of section 200, cognizance may be accepted or the complaint may be denied, depending on the circumstances.

  6. It is not essential for a Magistrate to sign the order sheet with the words "cognizance taken," but it is needed that the application of mind be expressed in a concise order. The decision to issue a process to the accused is equivalent to taking cognizance.

  7. The Magistrate must follow the same procedure as laid down whenever an investigating police officer submits "B" report and the complainant wishes to challenge the "B" report.

  8. Additionally, "In the matter at hand, nothing is there showing that the remedies under Section 154(1) and Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. have been sought, and no affidavit has been filed," the court stated. The affidavit attached to the complaint is quite cryptic, and thus fails to fulfil the mandate in Priyanka Srivastava." This means that before addressing the court under Section 200 Cr.P.C., the complainant shall make an explicit statement in the complaint that he has exhausted the remedies under Sections 154(1) and 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. As decided by the Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava case, the complainant must additionally present proof of exhausting the remedies envisioned by Sections 154(1) and 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. and file an affidavit to that effect. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide

  Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide In legal proceedings, a counterclaim is a vital tool that allows defendants to assert their own claims against the plaintiff. This strategic maneuver not only defends against the plaintiff's allegations but also enables defendants to seek their own relief. In this comprehensive guide, we delve into the intricacies of counterclaims, exploring their purpose, procedures, and implications in various legal contexts. Introduction to Counterclaims Definition A counterclaim is a legal claim brought by a defendant against the plaintiff in response to the plaintiff's initial complaint. It serves as a means for defendants to assert their own rights, defenses, or causes of action arising from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim. Purpose The primary purpose of a counterclaim is to allow defendants to present their side of the story and seek appropriate remedies or relief. By filing a counterclaim, defendants ca...
7 comments
Read more

Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint"

  Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint" When you receive a notification stating "Your complaint has been disposed under a closed complaint," it signifies the closure of the complaint you filed with the respective entity or organization. This phrase is commonly used by customer service departments, grievance redressal cells, regulatory bodies, or complaint management systems to inform complainants about the resolution status of their complaint. Here's a detailed explanation of what it means and its implications: Disposition of Complaint (0-7 days) : "Disposed" indicates that the complaint has been addressed, reviewed, and resolved by the concerned authority or entity. The closure of the complaint signifies that the responsible party has taken appropriate action to address the issues raised in the complaint. Closure Status (0-7 days) : "Closed complaint" indicates that the complaint resolution process ...
4 comments
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and inst...
10 comments
Read more