The Court declined to interfere in a writ petition seeking transfer of police investigation due to alleged corruption. It relied on Sakiri Vasu to hold that alternative remedies under Cr.P.C. exist and dismissed the petition.
None granted; writ petition dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1500 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-239 Year-2019 Thana- PATORI District- Samastipur
======================================================
VIPIN KUMAR Son of Sri Yogendra Rai Resident of Village- Fatehpur, P.S.Patori, District- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mrityunjay Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.Prabhat Kumar Verma
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-11-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
“(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction commanding upon the respondents to handover the investigation relating
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1500 of 2019 dt.15-11-2019 2/6
to Patori P.S. Case No. 239/2019 dated 16.06.2019 u/s 420, 504, 506, 385, 34 of the Indian Penal Code dated 16.06.2019 to any other free and independent agency or higher authority as the matter is related to mass scale corruption in Indira Awash Yojna and other Govt. sponsored development schemes within Chaksaho Panchayat in Patori, Samastipur and the authorities involved in the said corruption are being protected by the investigating officer and Sub-divisional Police Officer, Patori as is evident from the supervision report dated 14.07.2010 submitted by the S.D.P.O., Patori in Patori P.S. Case No. 239 of 2019 dated 16.06.2019;
(ii) For holding that the investigation of Patori P.S. Case No. 239/19 dated 16.06.2019 is not being conducted in free and impartial manner by the investigating officer and has become evident from the supervision report submitted by the SDPO, Patori, which manifest that by ignoring cogent documentary evidence, I.O. and SDPO are trying their level best to protect concerned BDO and Junior Engineer;
(iii) For issuance of any other writ, order of direction which your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
No. 239/2019, but the police is not investigating the case in a proper manner and the same suffers from several irregularities. The petitioner personally met the Superintendent of Police,
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1500 of 2019 dt.15-11-2019 3/6
Samastipur and submitted an application on 25.07.2019 with a request to take appropriate action in the matter. It is submitted that the police is not discharging their duties in impartial manner in investigating the case.
“11. In this connection we would like to state that if a person has a grievance that the police station is not registering his FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C., then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. by an application in writing. Even if that does not yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is still not registered, or that even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Section 156 (3) is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1500 of 2019 dt.15-11-2019
4/6
and also can direct a proper investigation to be made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under the same provision monitor the investigation to ensure a proper investigation.
17. In our opinion Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an F.I.R. and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., though briefly worded, in our opinion, is very wide and it will include all such incidental powers as are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation.
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) Cr.P.C. to order registration of a criminal offence and /or to direct the officer in charge of the concerned police station 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) Cr.P.C., we are of the opinion that they are implied in the above provision.
26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police station his first
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1500 of 2019 dt.15-11-2019 5/6
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 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
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1500 of 2019 dt.15-11-2019 6/6
petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.”
the above exposition of law, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter in exercise of its extra ordinary writ jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 20.11.2019 |
| Transmission Date | 20.11.2019 |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 226 to direct transfer of police investigation to another agency regarding alleged corruption.
Whether the present writ petition is maintainable in view of the existence of alternative remedies under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and Section 154(3) Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and OthersApplied¶34
Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2008) 2 SCC 409 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vipin Kumar
The State of Bihar
Vikash Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
