Petitioner sought fair investigation via criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after FIR registration via Section 156(3). Court cited Sakiri Vasu to discourage such petitions and dismissed it, directing approach to Magistrate.
Petition dismissed; liberty to approach concerned Magistrate for redress of grievance.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.
7329/2022
Anguri Devi W/o Late Shri Shyam Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Zilota, Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli (Raj.)
----Complainant/Petitioner Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Bairwa, Adv. For : Mr. Imran Khan, P.P. Respondent(s)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Order
02/12/2022
The petitioner-complainant has preferred this criminal miscellaneous petition seeking fair investigation.
A complaint has been filed by the complainant before the concerned Judicial Magistrate which was forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the concerned police station whereupon the present FIR came to be registered.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-7329/2022]
Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 2008 SC Page 907 has held that 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. 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 after registration of FIR, proper investigation has not been done by the police.
In view of above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the criminal miscellaneous petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.
However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the concerned Magistrate for redressing his grievance.
(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J
DANISH USMANI /36
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a criminal miscellaneous petition to ensure fair investigation after a complaint was forwarded by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.Explained¶19
Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 2008 SC Page 907 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Anguri Devi W/o Late Shri Shyam Lal
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
Director General Of Police, Jaipur
Superintendent Of Police, Karauli
Station House Officer, Police Station Sapotara
Uma Shanker Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
