|
A sessions court in Rohini has set aside an order for a magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR against a serving judge and a businessman for the alleged offences of extortion and false theft insurance claim.
While setting aside the order, the sessions court referred to a Supreme Court judgement, which held, "The magistrate is not supposed to act merely as a post office and needs to adopt a judicial approach while considering an application seeking investigation by the police." In May 2024, a magistrate court had passed an order to register a FIR against Judge Ajay Goel and a businessman. Both had challenged the order of FIR. " There can be no registration of FIR against a judicial officer without seeking the permission of the Chief Justice of High Court which is lacking in the present case," ASJ Jagmohan said in the order passed on February 12. Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Jagmohan Singh set aside the order of FIR on February 12. "There can be no registration of FIR against a judicial officer without seeking the permission of the Chief Justice of High Court, which is lacking in the present case," ASJ Jagmohan Singh said while passing the order. The court said that the impugned order can not be sustained and is hereby set aside. Both the present revision petitions are allowed. However, the court has clarified that the complainants are at liberty to lead pre-summoning evidence in the matter before the trial court. In an order passed on May 21, 2024, Metropolitan Magistrate passed an order on application and observed, "From a perusal of the record of the case collected, it appears that a proper investigation can only be conducted by verifying the telephone conversation between the parties and getting the same verified from FSL, which is beyond the reach of the complainant. Thus, since the evidence required to be collected is aging out, the truth will certainly not be within the reach of the applicant; applications under section 156(3) CrPC stand allowed." (ANI)
|
