A Delhi court on Friday set aside an order of a judicial magistrate and directed him to pass a ‘reasoned’ order, emphasing that every court’s primary objective is to establish the truth and that every investigating agency is also obligated to work towards ascertaining the truth.
Additional Sessions Judge Rakesh Kumar Singh was reviewing a revision petition filed by an advocate challenging the decision of a metropolitan magistrate.
The magisterial court had refused to direct the police to file an FIR based on the advocate’s complaint against his former client.
The advocate had a dispute with his client regarding professional fees, and subsequently, an FIR was lodged against him, accusing him of rape.
The court said that the police have the responsibility of uncovering the truth regarding the entire sequence of events.
After obtaining anticipatory bail, the advocate had approached the police with a counter complaint.
He had sought the registration of an FIR against his former female client, alleging that she had fabricated the story in an attempt to extort money from him.
The advocate claimed that the police took action based on the woman’s FIR and filed a charge sheet against him, which compelled him to approach the magisterial court to file a criminal case against the woman.
The magisterial court had then declined to grant relief to the advocate who had then filed a revision petition in the sessions court, which stated that the complainant’s claim was a cross-case involving the same parties and a series of related transactions.
ASJ Singh said that it is well known that every court should work solely to establish the truth and for this to happen, the basis itself must be truthful, and therefore, every investigating agency is also obligated to work towards ascertaining the truth.
“The order is set aside. The magistrate shall hear the complainant and pass a reasoned order,” ASJ said.
20230609-230006
