A Section 156(3) referral without the required affidavit vitiates the ensuing criminal proceedings.

Respondent No. 2 filed PCR No. 171/2020 before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The Magistrate referred the complaint to police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), leading to registration of Crime No. 238/2021 for offences under Sections 107, 203, 406, 417, 420, 426, 465 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

After investigation, police filed a B-final report; the Magistrate rejected it on 10 January 2023, took cognizance and directed registration of a criminal case against accused Nos. 1 and 2.

Accused No. 2 sought quashing under Section 482 CrPC, contending that the complainant had neither first approached the police nor filed the affidavit required by Priyanka Srivastava.

The respondents did not dispute those submissions.

1. Whether the Magistrate’s referral of the private complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC was sustainable when the complainant had not complied with the requirements in Priyanka Srivastava.

2. Whether the resulting criminal proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.

Section 156(3) CrPC empowers a Magistrate to refer a complaint to the police for investigation, while Section 482 CrPC preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of court.

Under Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2015) 6 SCC 287, a complainant seeking a direction under Section 156(3) must first pursue the prescribed police remedies and support the application with an affidavit.

The Supreme Court in S. N. Vijayalakshmi v. State of Karnataka, 2025 INSC 917, paras 44–48, affirmed that these directions are mandatory; although failure to file the affidavit is curable, it must be cured before the Magistrate makes a substantive order, and non-compliance at that stage may warrant quashing the order and consequential proceedings.

The Court noted that the complainant had not complied with the Priyanka Srivastava requirements before the Magistrate referred the complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC.

The petitioner’s submissions that the complainant had not first approached the police and had not filed an affidavit were undisputed.

Applying the principles stated in S. N. Vijayalakshmi, the Court held that the Magistrate’s referral, made without the required compliance, vitiated the ensuing proceedings; their continuation would amount to an abuse of process.

Any pending interlocutory application was disposed of as not surviving for consideration.