High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/24043/2016disposed of

Gurpreet And ANR. v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

2016-07-26Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-24043 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 26, 2016 Gurpreet Singh and another

...Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Kuljit Singh Bal, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against State of Punjab and other respondents for directing official respondents No.1 to 4 for conducting fair and impartial investigation from a DSP level police official in case GDD No.17 dated 23.01.2016 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324 and 326 IPC registered at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar Rural.

At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners mainly argued on one point that investigation should be conducted fairly and impartially and he did not press other relief sought in the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that investigation is not being conducted fairly and properly. As regarding this grievance that investigation is not being conducted fairly and properly, the petitioners have Vineet Gulati 2016.08.08 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh the remedy to approach Illaqa Magistrate, who has ample powers to

CRM No.M-24043 of 2016 -2supervise and even monitor the investigation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 (1) R.C.R. (Cr.) 392 has held that the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be entertained in routine and it is held as under:-

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 Cr.P.C. 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 concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

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."

The law laid down in above judgment has also been relied upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in T.C. Thangaraj v. V. Engammal and others, 2011 (3) R.C.R. (Cr.) 751.

As the petitioners have alternative remedies as stated in the above-said case, especially to approach the Judicial Magistrate, therefore, this petition cannot be entertained and the same is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Magistrate to avail alternative remedies. July 26, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Vineet Gulati 2016.08.08 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Whether reportable Yes/No