Hardeep Singh vs State Of Ut Chandigarh And Others

Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court

CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
125
CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 31.10.2026
HARDEEP SINGH ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF UT CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR
Present:- Petitioner In Person.
Mr. Samir Rathaur, Addl. P.P. U.T. Chandigarh
for respondent No.1.
*
YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 531(2)(a) of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for setting aside the order dated 17.03.2026
(Annexure P-6) passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Chandigarh in Crl. Misc. No.165 of 2022, whereby the application
under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was declined and was ordered to be treated as a
complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. as well as the judgment dated
22.09.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh in
Criminal Revision No.61 of 2026 and for issuance of appropriate directions
for registration of FIR and investigation in accordance with law.
2. Notice of motion.
3. Mr. Samir Rathaur, Addl. P.P. U.T. Chandigarh accepts notice
PRIYANKA THAKUR
2026.11.03 18:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M) -2-
on behalf of the respondent No.1.
4. The case of petitioner/complainant is that on 23.12.2021 at
about 02.00 PM, accused No.3 namely Bablu, who is servant of accused
Nos.1 and 2 restrained him near House No.1011, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh
and started abusing him. When the complainant asked him the reasons for
the same, accused started beating him with wooden and iron rod, as a result
of which, he suffered grievous injuries as well as injuries on his head. He
was taken to GMSH, Sector-16, Chandigarh, where he was medico-legally
examined. He approached the police as well as senior officers but FIR was
not registered, which necessitated the present complaint. A prayer was made
for sending the complaint to the concerned police station for registration of
FIR in terms of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under
Sections 307, 341, 506 and 34 of IPC, 1860.
5. Learned Magistrate before proceeding in the matter called for a
report from the police and it was reported that the matter has been inquired
into on the basis of various DDR entries and statements of both the parties
were recorded. However, no cognizable offence was found to have been
made out and preventive proceedings under Section 107/150 Cr.P.C. were
initiated against both the parties and the complaints were accordingly closed.
Learned Trial Magistrate on the basis of material placed on file came to the
conclusion that the victim was examined on 23.12.2021 and he had suffered
one lacerated wound on left temporal region measuring 4cm x 5cm and he
was advised to undergo CT Scan and the injuries have been caused with a
blunt weapon. The injury was kept under observation and has not been
PRIYANKA THAKUR
2026.11.03 18:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M) -3-
declared as grievous or dangerous to life. Learned Trial Magistrate further
observed that the matter has been inquired into by the police on multiple
occasions and no cognizable offence has been found to have been
committed. The identity of accused persons is known to the complainant and
the entire evidence including medical record is within his reach. The medical
record also does not disclose that an offence under Section 307 IPC has been
committed and learned Trial Magistrate refused to issue directions for
registration of FIR in exercise of powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and
rejected the prayer. However, the application has been treated as a complaint
under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and complainant has been called upon to lead
evidence in support of his complaint.
6. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner/complainant instituted the revision
petition and the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh has
dismissed the revision petition vide judgment dated 22.09.2026 holding that
the order passed by the learned Magistrate dated 17.03.2026 was
interlocutory in nature and no revision petition against the same is
maintainable.
7. Feeling aggrieved, the present petition has been instituted.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned counsel for U.T. Chandigarh and have gone through the material
available on record.
9. No material has been placed on file by the petitioner to show
that he has either suffered any grievous injury or any injury which could be
dangerous to life or that any cognizable offence is made out from the
PRIYANKA THAKUR
2026.11.03 18:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M) -4-
allegations levelled in the complaint by him. As such, learned Trial
Magistrate rightly believed the status report furnished by the police that no
cognizable offence was made out and in these circumstances, no direction
could have been issued to register an FIR and the only remedy with the
petitioner is to pursue the complaint and learned Magistrate has already
ordered that the application moved by the petitioner shall be treated as a
complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and he has been called upon to lead his
evidence.
10. It is well settled that power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is
discretionary and has to be exercised judiciously. Hon’ble Supreme Court in
(2015) 6 SCC 287, Priyanka Srivastava and another v. State of Uttar
Pradesh and others, has held that power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
should not be invoked in a routine manner and only in cases, where the
Court is satisfied that police investigation is necessary. In the present case
also, no cognizable offence has been committed. The identity of the accused
persons is known to the petitioner/complainant. The entire evidence
including medical record and witnesses are within his reach and he can
summon the record from the hospital where he was medico-legally
examined as well as at PGI, Chandigarh where he is also stated to have been
treated and investigation by the police in a non-cognizable offence is thus
not warranted.
11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the
considered opinion that the impugned order dated 17.03.2026, passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh and the judgment dated
PRIYANKA THAKUR
2026.11.03 18:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-61761-2026 (O&M) -5-
22.09.2026, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh,
do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and no interference in the
impugned order is called for.
12. Resultantly, the present petition is hereby dismissed. Since, the
incident pertains to the year 2021, learned Magistrate is directed to dispose
of the complaint case expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary
adjournments. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Court
concerned on 12.11.2026.
13. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
31.10.2026 (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR)
Priyanka Thakur
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
PRIYANKA THAKUR
2026.11.03 18:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document