Chattisgarh High Court
Padum Kumar Soni vs State Of C.G on 2 July, 2021
Page 1 of 3
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPCR No. 97 of 2021
Padum Kumar Soni, S/o Late Gokul Prasad Soni, Aged About 50
Years, R/o Sonar Para Champa, P.S. Champa, District- Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of C.G. through the Secretary Department of Home,
Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.)
2. Superintendent of Police, Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
3. Station House Officer, P.S. Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa
(C.G.)
4. Bhuwan Lal Soni, S/o Late Ramji Soni, Aged About 57 Years,
R/o Sonar Para Champa, P.S. Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate.
For State : Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order On Board
02.07.2021
1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for registration of FIR against respondent
No. 4 on the basis of complaint made by the petitioner.
2. The brief facts as projected by the petitioner are that the
petitioner and respondent No. 4 are residing in same place at
Sonar Para Champa, P.S. Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.). On 02.07.2012, respondent No. 4 came in the shop of
petitioner, taken silver 17576 gram (17.576 kg.) worth Rs.
8,34,860/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- cash with intention to cheat the
petitioner and gave a false written receipt in the name of elder
brother of the petitioner namely Laxminarayan alias Komal Soni.
The respondent No. 4 after taking silver and cash ran away from
Champa and despite the efforts made by them, they could not
search him out. In the year 2013, brother of the petitioner
Laxminarayan alias Komal Soni died. Thereafter, the entire
business of joint family was operating and running by the
petitioner. In the year 2018, the petitioner got address of
respondent No. 4, who was residing in Raipur, then along with
one Dinesh Soni, the petitioner went to Raipur and asked him to
return the silver and cash. Respondent No. 4 gave him false
assurance that he is coming to Champa and he will return the
silver and cash. This compelled the petitioner to lodge complaint
against respondent No. 4 before Police Station- Champa on
04.09.2020 with all relevant document available with him, still no
action has been taken by the police authorities against
respondent No. 4-Bhuwan Lal Soni.
3. From perusal of reliefs sought, it is quite clear that the petitioner
wants that on the basis of complaint, FIR should be registered
against respondent No. 4- Bhuwan Lal Soni.
4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh & others1, has examined the issue holding that
the petitioner has remedy of filing of complaint before the
concerned Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 200 of
the Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court has again considered and
decided the issue in Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v. Hemant
Yashwant Dhage2 and M. Subramaniam & another Vs. S.
Janaki & another3.
5. Considering the facts and materials on record and in light of the
law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the above
referred judgments, the present writ petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioner to file complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C.
1 (2008) 2 SCC 409
2 (2016) 6 SCC 277
3 (2020) 16 SCC 728
before the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class having
jurisdiction over the place of offence and in-turn Magistrate will
follow the procedure prescribed under the provisions of the
Cr.P.C.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
merits of the case whether the complaint discloses any criminal
offence or not.
7. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with
the aforesaid liberty granted in favour of the petitioner.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Arun
