Sandhya Singh v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Home Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.922 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District- ====================================================== Sandhya Singh D/o Madan Mohan Lal, R/o Mohalla- Ramjee Chak Digha, Near Bata Showroom, Danapur Cum Khagaul, P.S.- Digha, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar, Through The Home Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 2.

The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

4.

The Superintendent of Police, Patna.

5.

The Dy Superintendent of Police, Patna.

6.

The Officer In Charge Digha Police Station District- Patna. 7.

Nand Kishore Gupta S/o Madhu Sudan Lal , R/o Mohalla- Ramjee Chak, Digha Near Bata showroom, Danapur Cum Khagaul , P.S.- Digha, DistrictPatna. 8.

Neelam Kumari W/o Nand Kishore Gupta, R/o Mohalla- Ramjee Chak, Digha Near Bata Showroom, Danapur Cum Khagaul, P.S.- Digha , DistrictPatna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jagjit Roshan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Kumar Shanu, AC to AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-12-2022 The grievance of the petitioner is that her F.I.R. has not been registered and she was beaten by the private respondents.

On perusal of the writ application, however, it appears that the petitioner has not followed the procedure and has directly moved this Court for lodging of the F.I.R. In the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Ors.

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.922 of 2018(2) dt.19-12-2022 2/3 reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has in paragraph '24', '25' and '26' observed as under:- "24. In view of the abovementioned legal position, we are of the view that although Section 156(3) is very briefly worded, there is an implied power in the Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC to order registration of a criminal offence and/or to direct the officer in charge of the police station concerned to hold a proper investigation and take all such necessary steps that may be necessary for ensuring a proper investigation including monitoring the same. Even though these powers have not been expressly mentioned in Section 156(3) CrPC, we are of the opinion that they are implied in the above provision."

"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 CrPC. 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, first under Section 154(3) and Section 36 CrPC before the police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the Magistrate concerned 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) CrPC or other police officer referred to in Section 36 CrPC. 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) CrPC instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC. Moreover, he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC. Why then should writ petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are so many alternative remedies?"

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.922 of 2018(2) dt.19-12-2022 3/3 In the aforesaid view of the matter, this Court would not entertain this writ application. It is being disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application, if so advised, in the learned court below.

This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U