1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 3657 of 2008 IN Criminal Application No. 1371 of 2008 [Amit Prakash Ghate & another Vs. State of Mah. & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. S.D. Thombare, Adv., holding for Mr. N.B. Raut, Adv., for applicants. Mr. A.D. Sonak, APP for respondent no.1. Mr. F.T. Mirza, Adv., for original applicants. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 14th November,2008. 1. Heard. 2. This Court has decided Criminal Application No. 1371 of 2008 by giving following directions:- “5. The provisions, contained in Section 200 of Criminal Procedure Code, requiring statement of the complainant to be recorded when filed by the private person are mandatory. On this sole ground, the impugned order Annexure-D is set aside.” 3. By this application, applicant has expressed that he is confused as to the manner 2 in which the case should now proceed, in view that the order to take cognizance under Section 156 (3), Criminal Procedure Code, was passed by the Magistrate, while, in spite of willingness of the complainant, the statement, as contemplated under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code, was not recorded. 4. The confusion is without any foundation of law. 5. Section 156 of Criminal Procedure Code refers to the power of Police to investigate upon a direction by the Magistrate. It has nothing to do with the duty of Court to take cognizance only after having an affirmed statement in support of the complaint. 6. After tender of complaint, as in the present case, the complainant was bound to examine himself and thereafter the jurisdiction of the Magistrate either to issue process, direct the police to furnish a report under Section 202, Criminal Procedure Code, or to direct police to act under Section 156 (3) would accrue. 7. In the present case, after the compliance under Section 200 is done, the Magistrate would apply his mind and pass order according to law. 3 8. Application is, thus, misconceived, and is disposed of. Judge |Hedau|