Sadiq B. Hanchinmani vs State of Karnataka 2025 INSC 1282 - S.156(3) CrPC - Violation Of Injunction
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 156(3) - Quoted from Madhao v State of Maharashtra: When a Magistrate receives a complaint he is not bound to take cognizance if the facts alleged in the complaint disclose the commission of an offence. The Magistrate has discretion in the matter. If on a reading of the complaint, he finds that the allegations therein disclose a cognizable offence and the forwarding of the complaint to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) will be conducive to justice and save the valuable time of the Magistrate from being wasted in enquiring into a matter which was primarily the duty of the police to investigate, he will be justified in adopting that course as an alternative to taking cognizance of the offence itself. (Para 37) [Context: SC noted that in this case, JMFC had referred the matter to police under Section 156(3) CrPC, and the usage of ‘further’ was not in the context of Section 173(8) CrPC]
Violation of Injunction - Even if an injunction order is subsequently set aside, consequences for breach/violation of the same when it subsisted, could still befall upon the violator - Referred to Lavanya C v Vittal Gurudas Pai (Para 36)
Case Info
- Case name: Sadiq B. Hanchinmani vs The State of Karnataka & Ors.
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1282
- Coram: Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
- Judgment date: November 04, 2025
- Appeals: Criminal Appeals arising from SLP (Crl.) No.11336/2022 and Diary No.39619/2022
Caselaws and Citations
- Priyanka Shrivastava v. State of UP, (2015) 6 SCC 287.
- Madhao v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 5 SCC 615.
- Ramdev Food Products Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, (2015) 6 SCC 439.
- Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy v. V. Narayana Reddy, (1976) 3 SCC 252.
- National Bank of Oman v. Barakara Abdul Aziz, (2013) 2 SCC 488.
- Rameshbhai Pandurao Hedau v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 4 SCC 185.
- Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 19 SCC 401.
- Samee Khan v. Bindu Khan, (1998) 7 SCC 59.
- Lavanya C v. Vittal Gurudas Pai, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 499.
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 156(3), 173(8), 482, 460.
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 120B, 201, 419, 420, 468, 471.
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XLI Rule 5; Order XXXIX Rule 2-A; Section 151.
- Right to Information Act, 2005.
Referred Judgment:
CaseCiter
#SupremeCourt reiterates that even if an injunction order is subsequently set aside, consequences for breach or violation of the same when it subsisted, could still befall upon the violator. https://t.co/STqMdQ2HnZ pic.twitter.com/LfxWjz6b3v
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) November 4, 2025
#SupremeCourt reiterates position of law on Section 156(3) CrPC: Magistrate’s power to order investigation : https://t.co/STqMdQ2HnZ pic.twitter.com/Uy7h9AnA5T
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) November 4, 2025
