The court set aside the order of the magistrate directing the police to register an FIR for the alleged offences
New Delhi: A magistrate’s decision for the police to file a formal complaint against a businessman and a sitting judge for suspected extortion and bogus theft insurance claims has been overturned by a sessions court in Rohini.
In overturning the decision, the sessions court cited a ruling from the Supreme Court that said, “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.”
A magistrate court issued an order in May 2024 to file a formal complaint against Judge Ajay Goel and a businessman. Both have contested the FIR order.
In the February 12 ruling, ASJ Jagmohan said that “an FIR against a judicial officer cannot be registered without requesting the Chief Justice of High Court’s permission, which is lacking in the present case.”
Extra Sessions On February 12, Judge (ASJ) Jagmohan Singh overturned the FIR decision.
“A FIR against a judicial officer cannot be registered without the Chief Justice of the High Court’s consent, which is absent in this case,” ASJ Jagmohan Singh said in his ruling.
According to the court, the contested order is invalid and should be revoked. The current revision requests are both granted.
The complainants are free to lead pre-summoning evidence in the case before the trial court, the court has stated.
“From a review of the case record gathered, it seems 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 complainant’s reach,” the Metropolitan Magistrate noted in an order issued on May 21, 2024, in response to an application. Applications under section 156(3) CrPC are thus permitted since the petitioner will undoubtedly not be able to access the truth because the evidence that must be gathered is aging.
