Complaints To Magistrate

Key Takeaways

• A brief introduction of the concept of complaints under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
• A brief explanation of the provisions that specifically deal with the process of complaints to the Magistrate.
• Few landmark judgments explaining the concept.

Introduction

Chapter XV of CrPC deals with the provisions for complaints to a magistrate. A proper formal legal process of complaints before the Magistrate is described in Sections 200 to 203 of the said Act. The term “complaint” has been defined in Section 2 (d) of CrPC as “any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offense, but does not include a police report.” Once the complaint is made to the Magistrate, a further process that is meant to be followed by the Magistrate is mentioned in the prescribed sections of Chapter XV of CrPC. The complaint of any offense made by a complainant before the Magistrate could be either in oral or written form and the same needs to be examined or tried by the court of competent jurisdiction. In case the complaint so made is not before the court having jurisdiction of the same, it may transfer the case to the court competent to carry-on further proceedings or dismiss it. The detailed process regarding the complaints to the magistrate has been described in the article. 

Provisions for Complaints to Magistrate Under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Examination of complainant

Section 200 of CrPC:

Thissection provides that if a complaint is made before the Magistrate, then the Magistrate may examine the witness and the complainant and pen down such examination along with the signatures of the witness, complainant, and the Magistrate himself. However, he does not need to examine the witness if the complaint is made in written form by a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties or by a Court or by a Magistrate who makes over the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under section 192 of CrPC. Once a Magistrate has examined the complainant and the witness, the latter Magistrate to whom the case has been transferred under Section 192 cannot re-examine.

Procedure by Magistrate not competent to take cognizance of the case

Section 201 of CrPC:

The above-mentioned section provides that if the complaint is made to the Magistrate who is not competent to take the cognizance of the offense, then if the complaint is written, he shall return it for presentation to the proper Court of competence. However, if the complaint is not in a written form, then the Magistrate shall direct the complainant to file the complainant to the proper Court. 

Postponement of issue of process

Section 202 of CrPC:

The Section provides that if the magistrate receives a complaint of an offense of which either he is authorized or is made over to him under Section 192 of CrPC, then if he deems fit, may postpone the proceedings and ask for the investigation of such offense or may inquire himself to find out if the case is eligible for further proceedings or not. However, no investigation shall be directed in the cases where the Magistrate finds out that the offense complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Session or where the complainant and the witnesses present have not been examined on oath under section 200.

Dismissal of complaint

Section 203 of CrPC:

Section 203 provides that if after due consideration of the statements made by the witnesses and the complainant on oath, the Magistrate believes that there is no point for further proceedings, he shall dismiss the complaint and in such a case he shall mention the reasons for such actions in brief.

IMPORTANT CASE LAWS

Gurudas Balkrishna v. Chief Judicial Magistrate Goa [Misc. Appln. 202 Of 1992]

In the aforementioned case,a complaint was filed before the learned Magistrate on July 31, 1992, however, it was taken on record on August 3, 1992, and nothing happened even thereafter till September 25, 1992. As per the Roznamcha,on September 25, some other cases urgently required to be dealt with on apriority basis before the Magistrate and hence, the case was adjourned for the mentioned reason to February 19, 1993. The Hon’ble High Court then observed that engagement of the Court for a day in any other work delay the recording of complaintscannot be justified and that too for around five months as it is likely to frustrate the very purpose for which the criminal complaints are being filed.As a result, the application was allowed by the High Court and the Hon’ble Court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panaji, to record the evidence of the complainant and his witnesses within a week from the date of its order.

Rajendra Singh v.  State Of Bihar [2000 6 SCC 89]

In the instant case, the trial court acquitted the accused on the grounds that the court had no jurisdiction to proceed with any action over the complaint so filed. However, in an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Hon’ble Court held that the order of acquittal was illegal and in contravention of the provisions provided in the CrPC, as if the court did not have the competent jurisdiction in the concerned case, then it could have returned the complaint and asked for the presentation to the proper court of jurisdiction instead of acquitting the accused as a result.

Chandra Deo Singh vs. Prokash Chandra Bose and Anr. [AIR 1963 SC 1430]

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the concerned case set aside the dismissal of a complaint by the Magistrate on the grounds that, for determining the question of whether any process is to be issued or not, the Magistrate must be satisfied whether or not there is sufficient ground for the continuation of proceeding, and not whether there is sufficient ground for conviction in the complaint filed before the court.

Conclusion

A proper process, from making a complaint to a Magistrate to the proceedings and trial is all described in a detailed manner from Section 200 to Section 210 of CrPC. Every detailed requirement like the competence of the court where the complaint needs to be filed and proceeded with, the nature of the complaint, the circumstances under which the cases can be transferred so that no court interferes with the jurisdiction of the other court, etc. has been mentioned explicitly in the Code to avoid any kind of ambiguity when it comes to filing complaints to the Magistrate. Additionally, the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in various cases have provided how the prescribed provisions in the CrPC are required to be interpreted and executed accordingly without making any sort of changes, which are not directly or incidentally provided in the concerned provisions.