Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks about the circumstances under which a Magistrate can exercise powers under Section 159 of the CrPC.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
Section 159 of the CrPC is titled "Power to hold investigation or preliminary inquiry." It states that a Magistrate empowered under Section 190, upon receiving a police report under Section 157, may direct an investigation. Or, if he thinks fit, he may at once proceed, or depute any Magistrate subordinate to him to proceed, to hold a preliminary inquiry into the case, or otherwise to dispose of the case in the manner provided in this Code.
The report under Section 157 is the initial report submitted by the police. It can state either that the police are proceeding with the investigation, or (under Section 157(1)(b)) that the officer does not see sufficient ground for entering on an investigation.
- Therefore, the Magistrate can exercise power under Section 159 when the police are investigating to supervise or hold a parallel preliminary inquiry. This covers option (B).
- The Magistrate can also exercise this power when the police decide not to investigate (as reported under S.157(1)(b)), to direct them to investigate or to conduct an inquiry himself. This covers option (A).
The power under Section 159 is essentially a power of supervision and control over the police investigation at its very initial stage, triggered by the police report under Section 157. It can be exercised in both scenarios.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The powers under Section 159 of the CrPC can be exercised by a Magistrate both when the police decide not to investigate and when the investigation is ongoing.
Having heard the learned Counsels for the parties, and on perusal of the ma terial on record, the primary issue which arises for consideration of this Court is ”whether a review or recall of an order passed in a criminal proceeding initiated under section 340 of CrPC is permissible or not?” [...] A careful consideration of the statutory provisions and the aforesaid decisions of this Court clarify the now-well settled position of jurisprudence of Section 362 of CrPC which when summarized would be that the criminal courts, as envisaged under the CrPC, are barred from altering or reviewing in their own judgments except for the exceptions which are explicitly provided by the statute, namely, correction of a clerical or an arithmetical error that might have been committed or the said power is provided under any other law for the time being in force. As the courts become functus officio the very moment a judgment or an order is signed, the bar of Section 362 CrPC becomes applicable. Despite the powers provided under Section 482 CrPC which, this veil cannot allow the courts to step beyond or circumvent an explicit bar. It also stands clarified that it is only in situations wherein an application for recall of an order or judgment seeking a procedural review that the bar would not apply and not a substantive review where the bar as contained in Section 362 CrPC is attracted. Numerous decisions of this Court have also elaborated that the bar under said provision is to be applied stricto sensu.
(Extracted with edits and revisions from Vikram Bakshi v. RP Khosla 2025 INSC 1020)