{"id":342539,"date":"2025-02-28T17:00:08","date_gmt":"2025-02-28T11:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=342539"},"modified":"2025-03-01T16:34:53","modified_gmt":"2025-03-01T11:04:53","slug":"prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> While deciding the instant appeal by a husband and wife (appellants) aggrieved by the decision of Single Judge Bench of Calcutta High Court rejecting the appellants’ criminal revisions, the Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia*<\/span> and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ., clarified the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh<\/span>, (2015) 6 SCC 287<\/a>, all applications before the Court where Section 156(3), CrPC applications are made must be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. Such a step could only be prospective in nature, and this is clearly reflected from the very language used by the Judges<\/span> in Priyanka Srivastava (supra).<\/span><\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The appellants are accused in 2 different cases under Sections 120-B<\/a>, 420<\/a>, 467<\/a>, 468<\/a>, 469<\/a>, 471<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), read with Section 66A(a)(b)(c)<\/doclink> of the Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a> (‘IT Act’); and, Sections 466<\/a>, 469<\/a>, 471<\/a> read with 120-B(ii)<\/a> of IPC<\/a>. The nature of allegations in these two cases is similar against the appellants, relating to forgery, fraud, deception, cheating, damage caused to reputation, unlawful extraction of money, threat, misrepresentation and criminal conspiracy etc.<\/p>\n

The appellants had contended before the High Court that FIRs against them were motivated and false, and thus liable to be quashed, but also that the second FIR had been registered on the complaint which was filed before the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of CrPC, and it was not accompanied by an affidavit and therefore, the law as laid down by this Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh<\/span>, (2015) 6 SCC 287<\/a>, has been violated as all such complaints should now be accompanied by an affidavit.<\/p>\n

The Single Judge Bench of the High Court had opined that directions in Priyanka Shrivastava<\/span> (supra) could only operate prospectively and will not have any retrospective application and will thus not be applicable to the complaint lodged against the appellants in the year 2010-2011.<\/p>\n

In the instant appeal, the appellants argued that all the judgments of Supreme Court are retrospective in nature and therefore it cannot be said that this would not be retrospective particularly when it has not been specifically stated in the judgment of Priyanka Srivastava<\/span> (supra) that it will operate prospectively.<\/p>\n

Court’s Assessment:<\/h3>\n

Perusing the contentions, the Court pointed out that the law of prospective and retrospective operation is absolutely clear. Whereas a law made by the legislature is always prospective in nature unless it has been specifically stated in the statute itself about its retrospective operation, the opposite is true for the law which is laid down by a Constitutional Court, or law as it is interpretated by the Court.<\/p>\n

The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively<\/span>. The prospective operation of a judgment is normally done to avoid any unnecessary burden to persons or to avoid undue hardships to those who in good faith had done something with the understanding of the law as it existed at the relevant point of time. Further, it is done not to unsettle something which has long been settled, as that would cause injustice to many.<\/p>\n

Perusing Priyanka Shrivastava (supra)<\/span>, it was observed that the issue was regarding frivolous complaints being filed before the Magistrate only to harass people<\/span>. The Court highlighted Para 30 of Priyanka Srivastava (supra)<\/span> case wherein the Court began its direction with “In our considered opinion, a stage has come in this country …” which signified that what the Court intended was that from now onward it would be necessary that an application would be accompanied by an affidavit<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Therefore, on basis of the afore-stated analysis, the Court opined that the High Court was right in holding that the direction that a complaint will be accompanied by an affidavit, will be prospective in nature. Hence, the instant appeals were dismissed.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

CASE DETAILS<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n
\n

Citation:<\/span>
2025 SCC OnLine SC 443<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Appellants :<\/span>
Kanishk Sinha<\/p>\n

Respondents :<\/span>
State of West Bengal<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case<\/p>\n

For Petitioner(s):<\/span>
Petitioner-in-person<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span>
Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, AOR Ms. Debarati Sadhu, Adv. Mr. Anant, Adv.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

CORAM :<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\"Sudhanshu
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"Ahsanuddin
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively”.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":342541,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[32378,10141,44753,72986,79202,21224],"class_list":["post-342539","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-cheating","tag-fraud","tag-justice-sudhanshu-dhulia","tag-prospective-operation","tag-prospective-operation-of-judgment","tag-section-1563-crpc"],"yoast_head":"\nSC clarifies the prospective nature of direction in Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-02-28T11:30:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-01T11:04:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"SC clarifies the prospective nature of direction in Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-02-28T11:30:08+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-01T11:04:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"description\":\"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Section156(3) CrPC application directions\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SC clarifies the prospective nature of direction in Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications","description":"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit","og_description":"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-02-28T11:30:08+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-01T11:04:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/","name":"SC clarifies the prospective nature of direction in Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp","datePublished":"2025-02-28T11:30:08+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-01T11:04:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"description":"The judgment of the Court will always be retrospective in nature unless the judgment itself specifically states that the judgment will operate prospectively.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Section156(3) CrPC application directions"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/28\/prospective-operation-direction-section1563-crpc-applications-clarified-sc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SC clarifies prospective nature of direction in 2015\u2019s Priyanka Shrivastava case on Section 156(3) CrPC applications being supported by affidavit"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Section1563-CrPC-application-directions.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":181944,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/01\/17\/applications-s-1563-crpc-supported-affidavit-duly-sworn-applicant\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":0},"title":"Applications under S. 156(3) CrPC are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn in by applicant","author":"Saba","date":"January 17, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of K.N. Phaneendra, J., decided a criminal petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC, wherein it quashed the order passed by the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of CrPC directing investigation in a criminal case. The respondent-applicant had filed a private complaint\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":239638,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/25\/kar-hc-is-it-mandatory-to-file-an-affidavit-for-invocation-of-jurisdiction-of-magistrate-under-s-1563-crpc-petition-allowed-partly\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":1},"title":"Kar HC | Is it mandatory to file an affidavit for invocation of jurisdiction of Magistrate under S. 156(3) CrPC? Petition allowed partly","author":"Editor","date":"November 25, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: John Michael Cunha J., allowed the petition partly stating that Section 156(3) CrPC applications are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. The facts of the case are such that Respondent 2 presented\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":218657,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/27\/utt-hc-non-filing-of-affidavit-along-with-the-application-under-s-1563-of-crpc-held-to-be-a-curable-defect\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":2},"title":"Utt HC | Non-filing of affidavit along with the application under S. 156(3) of CrPC held to be a curable defect","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. contemplated a criminal revision petition, where the main question which had to be decided was related to the revisional power exercised by the Sessions Judge, where an order was rejected by him under Section 156(3) of CrPC and same was held by the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":243622,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/09\/chh-hc-power-under-s-1563-of-the-crpc-warrants-application-of-judicial-mind-and-it-has-to-be-supported-by-an-affidavit\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":3},"title":"Chh HC | Power under S. 156(3) of the CrPC warrants application of judicial mind and it has to be supported by an affidavit","author":"Editor","date":"February 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal J., quashed the impugned order and allowed the petition. The present petition was directed against the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate in an application filed under Section 156(3) of the CrPC and consequent registration of FIR for offences punishable under Sections 420,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":262049,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/19\/applications-under-section-156-3-cr-p-c-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-filing-of-affidavit-a-must-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":4},"title":"Applications under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. being filed only to harass other; Filing of affidavit a must: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"February 19, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the Magistrate had passed an order under Section 156(3) CrPC even in absence of an affidavit duly sworn by the complainant, the bench of BR Gavai* and Krishna Murari, JJ that many a times the applications under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. are\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Applications-under-Section-156-3-Cr.P.C.-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-Filing-of-affidavit-a-must.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Applications-under-Section-156-3-Cr.P.C.-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-Filing-of-affidavit-a-must.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Applications-under-Section-156-3-Cr.P.C.-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-Filing-of-affidavit-a-must.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Applications-under-Section-156-3-Cr.P.C.-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-Filing-of-affidavit-a-must.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Applications-under-Section-156-3-Cr.P.C.-being-filed-only-to-harass-other-Filing-of-affidavit-a-must.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":149624,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/08\/14\/applications-under-s-1563-crpc-are-to-be-supported-by-an-affidavit-duly-sworn-to-by-applicant-invoking-jurisdiction-of-the-magistrate\/","url_meta":{"origin":342539,"position":5},"title":"Applications under S. 156(3) CrPC are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn to by applicant invoking jurisdiction of the Magistrate","author":"Saba","date":"August 14, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: While passing the order in a criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC praying to quash the proceedings in the investigation in a criminal case, a Single Judge Bench of K.N. Phaneendra,J. held that direction of investigation under Section 156(3) warrants application of judicial mind. Litigant cannot\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/342539","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=342539"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/342539\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/342541"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=342539"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=342539"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=342539"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}