The Supreme Court has reiterated that a Magistrate’s order taking cognizance of a police report cannot be set aside merely because it lacks detailed reasoning. As long as the Magistrate forms an opinion about the existence of a prima facie case after examining the case materials, a reasoned order is not essential.
An FIR was filed by the deceased’s second wife, alleging that he misrepresented himself as unmarried, married her in 1990, had three children, and later, along with the Appellants, harassed and evicted her. The Additional Judicial Commissioner took cognizance of the case, but the High Court set aside the order, citing lack of prima facie material against the Appellants, and directed a fresh order to be passed.
The Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed, “In the present case, we find that the Additional Judicial Commissioner has taken cognizance while recording a finding that - from a perusal of the case diary and case record, a prima facie case was made out against the accused, including the Appellants. In Bhushan Kumar v State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 5 SCC 424, this Court held that an order of the Magistrate taking cognizance cannot be faulted only because it was not a reasoned order;”
The Bench added, “Perusal of the entire gamut of the pleadings of the Appellants does not disclose any categorical statement to the effect that during investigation by the police, no evidence has emerged to warrant taking of cognizance, much less against the Appellants. The only averment which has been made is that the Trial Court had not recorded the prima facie material against the Appellants because it does not exist. This is too simplistic an argument and does not shift the burden from the Appellants of taking a categorical stand that no material whatsoever for taking cognizance is available in the police papers/case diary against the Appellants.”
“we find the approach of the Additional Judicial Commissioner correct inasmuch as while taking cognizance, it firstly applied its mind to the materials before it to form an opinion as to whether any offence has been committed and thereafter went into the aspect of identifying the persons who appeared to have committed the offence.” it stated.
The Court concluded that, based on the facts, circumstances, and arguments presented, the cognizance order dated 13.06.2019 was legally valid and did not warrant interference by the High Court.
Read Here: