Jharkhand High Court
Tulsi Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 25 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (Cr.) No. 176 of 2021
Tulsi Mahto, aged about 62 years, S/o Late Ganesh Mahto, resident of
Village- Rochap, P.O. & P.S. Patratu, District- Ramgarh (Jharkhand)
... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of
Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi
2. The Secretary, Home Affairs, Government of Jharkhand, Project
Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi
3. The Director General of Police, Jharkhand at Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.
Doranda, District- Ranchi
4. The I.G. Bokaro, Sector-IV, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. & P.S. Bokaro,
District- Bokaro
5. The D.I.G., Hazaribag near District More, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. &
District- Hazaribag, Pin 825301
6. The Superintendent of Police, Ramgarh, P.O., P.S. & District- Ramgarh
7. The Officer In-Charge, Patratu Police Station, P.O. & P.S. Patratu,
District- Ramgarh ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Prajapati, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Niki Sinha, Spl.P.P.
-----
07/25.11.2021. Heard Mr. Arvind Prajapati, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mrs. Niki Sinha, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.
2. This criminal writ petition has been filed for lodging the F.I.R. against
the person whose name has been disclosed in paragraph 5 of the petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
already filed a petition before the competent authority and in spite of that
F.I.R. has not been lodged.
4. Writ jurisdiction has been invoked and the petitioner is having
alternative remedy. A reference may be made to the case of Sakiri Vasu v.
State of Uttar Pradesh and others , reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409.
Paragraphs 27 and 28 of the said judgment are quoted herein below:
"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 CrPC 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 police
officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section
156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal
complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ
petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC.
28. It is true that alternative remedy is not an absolute bar
to a writ petition, but it is equally well settled that if there is
an alternative remedy the High Court should not ordinarily
interfere."
5. In view of the above facts and considering that the petitioner is
having alternative remedy, the Court is not inclined to pass any positive
order in this case.
6. The petitioner is set at liberty to avail alternative remedy under the
Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, this criminal writ petition stands disposed of with the
aforesaid liberty.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
