Duty of Magistrate

Police investigated the matter and submitted report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. for offences under Ss. 320 & 279, P.P.C. but the Magistrate took cognizance of offences under Ss. 302, 201 & 120-B, P.P.C.

Validity

High Court observed that no power was vested with any Court including the High Court to direct the SHO either not to submit or submit a report in a particular manner i.e. against only such person as the Court desired or only with respect to such offence(s) as the Court wished

Magistrate had passed the order without providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, which was a violation of Art. 10-A of the Constitution

Magistrate, no doubt, was not bound by the report submitted by police under S. 173, Cr.P.C. but he could only agree or disagree with the conclusions arrived at by the Investigating Officer

Impugned order was set aside and the Magistrate was directed to pass an order afresh after hearing the parties

Application was allowed.

Magistrate for the purpose of examination of report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. exercises two kinds of powers, one as judicial and the other as administrative

While functioning on administrative side he discharges his duties as a persona designata and not as a Court, and while discharging his duties as a persona designata although he is required to examine the material placed before him, but is not bound to explain each and every aspect of the case and give reasons for acceptance or rejection

Magistrate has to either agree or disagree but not otherwise.

Section 173, Cr.P.C., provides that after completion of investigation, the incharge of police station shall submit report through Public Prosecutor before the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence on it and if he finds that there is sufficient evidence against the accused then he has power to take the cognizance of the offence

If, the Magistrate is of the view that the proper investigation has not been conducted and requires further investigation then he can direct the officer incharge of the police station to make further investigation.

Judicial Magistrate conducting test identification proceedings is duty bound to decide any objection raised by the accused with regard to their being shown to the witnesses at the police station

Failure of Judicial Magistrate to do so would reduce the value of such test identification proceedings.

Judicial Magistrate is not bound to agree with report submitted by police under S. 173, Cr.P.C., and he is at liberty either to agree or disagree with conclusions reached by investigating officer subject to giving cogent reason for conclusion arrived at by him and his conclusion must be laced with evidence showing application of judicial mind.

To that end Magistrate must make inquiry before recording confession.