Jagdish vs Union Of India And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 20615 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagdish vs Union Of India And Ors on 20 November, 2024

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152267



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH




                                    CRM-M
                                        M No.56840 of 2024 (O&M)
                                       Date of Decision: 20.11.2024

Jagdish                                                     .....Petitioner
                   versus
Union of India and others                                 .....Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE


Present :    Mr. B.S.Beniwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
             Mr. Tapan Masta, Advocate for Union of India.

                                 ****

SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral) ral) The grievance of the petitioner petitioner, who happens to be the

complainant, is essentially of non-registration non registration of offences by the

respondents despite the said authorities having been informed of

commission of cognizable offences.

2. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 202

provides for ample remedy to the complainant complainants/victims arising out of the

cause of non-registration registration of case as well as non non-conduction conduction of

investigation in a free, fair and expeditious manner. The provision of

Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 175 of BNSS)

and Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 223 ooff BNSS)

can very well be invoked by the complainant by filing an application

before the Magistrate of the area concerned.

3. The petitioner does not appear to have availed either of the

aforesaid remedies. Even the law on this point is clear in tterms erms of

judgment rendered by Constitution Bench of Apex Court in Lalita

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152267

Kumari vs. State of U.P. (2014) 2 SCC 1, wherein it has been

categorically held that once the information/complaint reveals

commission of cognizable offence, registration of an FIR is mandatory.

However, the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court has made certain

exceptions to the extent that police can conduct enquiry before

registration of FIR but only to ascertain whether cognizable offence has

been committed or not especially in complicated offences and special

offences etc.

4. In view of the above, this Court declines interference and

relegates the complainant to avail the aforesaid remedies before the

Magistrate of the area concerned.

5. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.

                                                                                 (SHEEL NAGU)
                                                                                 CHIEF JUSTICE

 20.11.2024
ravinder             Whether speaking/reasoned                         √Yes/No
                     Whetherreportable                                 Yes/No√




                                                  2 of 2