A Complaint Under CrPC Must Be Filed Before a Judicial Magistrate, Not an Executive Magistrate : Supreme Court
In B.N. John v. State of U.P. & Anr., the Supreme Court clarified that a complaint under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) must be filed before a Judicial Magistrate, not an Executive Magistrate. The Court referred to Section 2(d) of the CrPC, defining a complaint, and relied on Gulam Abbas v. State of U.P., which distinguished between judicial and executive magistrates. The Court held that complaints related to Section 186 (obstruction of a public servant) and Section 353 (assaulting a public servant) must be filed by a public servant before a Judicial Magistrate for cognizance to be valid under Section 195 of the CrPC.
In the case at hand, the appellant was charged under Sections 186 and 353, but no written complaint by a public servant was filed as required under Section 195(1) of the CrPC. The Court emphasized that such complaints must precede the Magistrate’s cognizance. It ruled that the cognizance taken by the Trial Court was "illegal" because it lacked a valid complaint. Furthermore, the FIR did not meet the necessary criteria for Section 353, as it did not involve assault or criminal force.
Citing State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal, the Court stated that FIRs lacking prima facie grounds for an offense can be quashed. The Court quashed the criminal proceedings, ruling that the cognizance and subsequent orders were contrary to law.