In this petition, the petitioner sought a writ to register an FIR regarding cheque fraud committed by her late husband. The bench noted the existence of alternative remedies under Cr.P.C. and highlighted that the petitioner had already entered a settlement in the underlying proceedings. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~29
CORAM:
“i) To issue Writ for registration of FIR by Delhi Police, P.S. Karol Bagh, New Delhi in complaint involving conspiracy, cheating, fraud, forgery and filing of petition (Arbn.) No. OMP Comm.7821/2019 against husband of petitioner in year 2019, though he had died 5 months earlier to alleged date of finance, i.e. 11.12.2016, in the interest of justice.”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2024 at 12:01:44
Judicial Magistrate with an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. seeking the prayer for registration of the FIR against the respondent. The said application is pending consideration and the next date of hearing is 24.12.2024. It is also informed that the petitioner has accepted certain amounts and entered into settlement with the accused in the OMP as well as in the proceedings initiated under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
‘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) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in Section 36 Cr.P.C. 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) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are so many alternative remedies?
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
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2024 at 12:01:44
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.’
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J
OCTOBER 8, 2024 na
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/10/2024 at 12:01:44
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition for registration of an FIR when alternative remedies under Cr.P.C. exist and a settlement has been reached.
Whether the petitioner is marginalized since her husband died before the alleged date of finance.
Whether the present petition is maintainable in light of the Sakiri Vasu decision.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and OthersExplained¶15
(2008) 2 SCC 409 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 1 enactments
Mrs. Sonia
The State
Manoj Kumar Ohri
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
