Jai Kanwar v. State Of Chandigarh And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 12835 of 2022 Date of Decision: 28.03.2022 Jai Kanwar .......... Petitioner

Versus

State of U.T., Chandigarh and others .......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR

Present:

Ms. Vrinda Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, APP, U.T., Chandigarh **** SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL) 1.

Since, the complaint(s) / representation(s) carried in AnnexureP-1, remain inactioned on the part of the police authorities concerned, thereupon, the petitioner is led to access this Court, for its making a direction upon the respondents concerned for action being taken thereon. 2.

However, even if there is any inaction on the part of the authorities concerned, to galvanize the police machinery, on Annexure P-1, yet the afore inaction, can be remedied through the petitioner's accessing the learned Magistrate concerned, with an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. The reason being that with the availability of the afore alternative remedy to the petitioner, thereupon the extant petition, hence, claiming the afore relief is mis-constituted, and, also is not maintainable at this stage before this Court.

3.

Therefore, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to access the learned Magistrate concerned, with a petition under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and, upon its presentation before him / her, the latter shall make orders thereon, in accordance with law. March 28, 2022 ( SURESHWAR THAKUR ) 'dk kamra'

JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2022.03.28 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document