Delhi High Court
Savitri Devi vs Commissioner Of Police on 11 January, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~35
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. No.103/2012
% Judgment delivered on: 11th January, 2012
SAVITRI DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.C.B. Singh, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP.
SI Satya Pal, PS N.U. Pur, Delhi
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Notice issued.
2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of respondent.
3. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the
respondent to lodge FIR against the accused persons under Section
302/34 IPC.
4. Ld. APP has relied upon "Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and
others" 2008(2) SCC 409 the relevant paras are reproduced as under:
"25. We have elaborated on the above matter because we
often find that when someone has a grievance that his FIR
has not been registered at the police station and/or a
proper investigation is not being done by the police, he
rushes to the High Court to file a writ petition or a petition
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. We are of the opinion that the
High Court should not encourage this practice and should
ordinarily refuse to interfere in such matters, and relegate
the petitioner to his alternating remedy, firstly under
Section 154(3) and Section 36 Cr.P.C. before the
concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, by
approaching the concerned Magistrate under Section
156(3).
26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been
registered by the police station his first remedy is to
approach the Superintendent of Police under Section
154(3) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in
Section 36 Cr.P.C. If despite approaching the
Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to in
Section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can
approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ
petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover
he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint
under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ petitions
or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are so
many alternative remedies?
27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate
has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and
to ensure a proper investigation, and for this purpose he
can monitor the investigation to ensure that the
investigation is done properly (though he cannot
investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the
practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section
482 Cr.P.C. simply because a person has a grievance that
his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after
being registered, proper investigation has not been done
by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under
Sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police
officers, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal
complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a
writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C."
5. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed the complaint case under
Section 200 of CrPC r/w Section 156 (3) before the ld. Metropolitan
Magistrate, Karkardooma and the said complaint is fixed for hearing
on 29.05.2012.
6. Therefore he has orally prayed that the trial court be directed to
expedite the Complaint Case. Ld. APP on the other hand submits on
seeing the complaint which is at page No.18. The preliminary enquiry
has been conducted and aksajara has been sent however the police has
received the report from the FSL in this regard.
7. In the circumstances I direct the SHO New Usmanpur to give
the photocopy of the report to the petitioner so that he may lead
evidence in support of his complaint.
8. I expect from the ld. court concerned to expedite the matter as
possible and expeditiously. No further order required.
9. Crl.M.C. No.103/2012 disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J
JANUARY 11, 2012/ns
