Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) holds a unique place in India’s legal system, empowering magistrates with the authority to direct the police to initiate investigations into cognizable offences. This provision not only serves as a critical bridge between the judiciary and law enforcement but also provides recourse for victims when police inaction or reluctance creates barriers to justice. Given the complexities of the justice delivery system and frequent allegations of police inaction in India, understanding Section 156(3) CrPC is essential for litigants, lawyers, and the public.
Courts have repeatedly underscored the significance of this section in ensuring the principle of rule of law is upheld and that no serious offence goes uninvestigated due to administrative inertia. But what exactly does Section 156(3) empower the magistrate to do? How is this provision applied in practice, and what checks and balances does the law prescribe? This article explores these questions through legal analysis, case studies, and insights from legal experts.
Section 156(3) of the CrPC reads:
“Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as above-mentioned.”
In essence, this provision allows a magistrate, upon receiving information or a complaint about a cognizable crime, to direct the local police station to register an FIR and proceed with an investigation. This often comes into play when the police refuse to act or delay action on credible complaints.
Cognizable offences—those where police can arrest without warrant—are critical to public order (e.g., murder, theft, assault). With Section 156(3), the magistracy acts as a safeguard, offering an avenue for complainants if the police fail their duty. It prevents arbitrary refusals to investigate and reinforces the criminal justice chain.
An aggrieved person typically files an application before the magistrate after exhausting remedies under Section 154 (lodging FIR) and Section 156(1) (general powers of police to investigate). The application generally must include:
Upon scrutiny, the magistrate may:
The Supreme Court, particularly in Priyanka Srivastava vs. State of UP (2015), clarified that applications under Section 156(3) CrPC must be supported by an affidavit. This aims to prevent frivolous or vexatious litigations, as the affidavit pins liability on the complainant in case of a false assertion.
“The application under Section 156(3) CrPC is not intended to be a substitute for a regular FIR, nor a license for fishing expeditions—judicial minds must apply their discretion judiciously.”
— Supreme Court of India, Priyanka Srivastava Judgment
Beyond requiring affidavits, courts have recommended that applicants also show some effort was made to approach the police first, thus keeping frivolous claims in check.
A 2018 Delhi High Court matter illustrated the section’s significance. The complainant alleged police inaction after filing a report about a financial fraud. The magistrate, satisfied with supporting documentation, ordered police investigation under Section 156(3). This led to a subsequent FIR and arrest, affirming judicial oversight over police investigations.
Conversely, in instances where parties misuse Section 156(3) to harass rivals—as witnessed in some family or property disputes—courts have dismissed such applications outright and, in some cases, imposed costs.
While Section 156(3) is a tool to safeguard justice, its misuse or overuse is an ongoing concern:
Legal reforms and technological improvements—for instance, in online FIR registration—aim to minimize the need for Section 156(3) applications by making police complaint mechanisms more accessible and accountable.
To further check abuse, several courts have directed that:
At its core, Section 156(3) CrPC is about judicial discretion. A magistrate must ensure the application is genuine, supported by facts, and does not circumvent the intended course of criminal justice. Legal scholars note that such discretion, exercised judiciously, prevents arbitrary investigation orders that might disrupt individuals’ rights or lead to investigative overreach.
Magistrates evaluating applications commonly check:
This layered scrutiny not only protects the rights of accused persons but also upholds public confidence in the legal process.
Globally, judicial supervision of police investigations is less pronounced than in India. In the UK, for example, the police have significant autonomy in whether to investigate or not. Judicial review kicks in only when gross injustice is alleged.
In contrast, Section 156(3) underscores the Indian judiciary’s activist stance—filling gaps left by administrative hesitance, and acting as a counterbalance to police discretion.
Section 156(3) CrPC acts as a critical corrective measure, empowering magistrates to ensure cognizable offences do not go unchecked due to police inertia or bias. While its use must be filtered through judicial discretion and supported by robust procedural safeguards, the provision remains a pillar of prompt justice for countless aggrieved individuals.
Continued judicial vigilance, informed use by advocates, and further streamlining of police procedures will help maintain the integrity and utility of this powerful provision.
What is Section 156(3) CrPC?
Section 156(3) of the CrPC allows a magistrate to direct the police to investigate a cognizable offence if the complainant feels the police are not acting on their complaint.
Is it mandatory to approach the police before filing under Section 156(3) CrPC?
Yes, courts expect complainants to first approach the police for registering an FIR. Only when the police fail to act, an application under Section 156(3) is typically entertained.
What documents are needed for an application under Section 156(3)?
Applicants should provide details of the alleged offence, proof of their complaint to the police, supporting evidence, and an affidavit verifying the facts.
Can Section 156(3) CrPC be misused?
While the provision is vital, misuse has been reported when individuals use it for personal enmity or harassment. Courts have set procedural safeguards to reduce such abuse.
What is the role of affidavits in Section 156(3) applications?
Affidavits are now mandatory as they hold the applicant accountable for the truth of the statements, deterring false or frivolous complaints.
Do all magistrates have the power under Section 156(3) CrPC?
Only those magistrates empowered under Section 190 CrPC can exercise this authority, ensuring proper legal oversight.
India’s criminal justice system is built upon countless statutes, but few are as frequently invoked—yet…
India stands as the world's largest democracy, a dynamic system underpinned by a deeply embedded…
Social justice sits at the heart of the Indian Constitution, woven into its fabric through…
India’s federal structure, as designed by the framers of the Constitution, anticipates both cooperation and…
Few decisions in Indian judicial history have transformed the interpretation of fundamental rights as profoundly…
In the digital era, internet freedom—and its limits—are fiercely debated across India. Section 67A of…