Harbinder Singh Kohli vs State Of Punjab And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 10826 P&H

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH
260
                                            CRM-M-42288-2020 (O&M)
                                            Date of Decision: 08.09.2022
HARBINDER SINGH KOHLI
                                                                  ...Petitioner
                                   Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
                                                               ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:    None for the petitioner.

            Ms. Monika Jalota, Sr, DAG Punjab.

                   ****

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)

By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks issuance

of directions to respondent No.2 to decide the complaint dated

29.10.2018 moved by the petitioner and to set aside the conclusion report

vide which complaints dated 27.08.2018 and 09.07.2018, were filed.

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner today.

Learned State counsel submits that on the aforesaid

complaints of the petitioner, inquiry was conducted and the private

respondents were called and joined the investigation and that after giving

proper hearing to both the parties, the complaints were filed.

I have heard the learned State counsel and also gone through

the material on record.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P.

and others, (2008) 2 SCC 409, has held that in case of non-registration of

an FIR/improper investigation, the remedy of the aggrieved person is not

1 of 2

260 CRM-M-42288-2020 (O&M) -2-

to approach this Court, but s/he is at liberty to approach the Magistrate

concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Relevant extract of the said

judgment reads as under:-

In our opinion Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an F.I.R. and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., though briefly worded, in our opinion, is very wide and it will include all such incidental powers as are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation.

Above all, there is no representation on behalf of the

petitioner today.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed with

liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedy in terms of the aforesaid

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, if so advised.

08.09.2022                                  (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
Aman Jain                                           JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                   2 of 2