The High Court disposed of a petition seeking directions for fair investigation of an FIR. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that Writ jurisdiction or Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be invoked for such grievances as Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate is the appropriate remedy.
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.
[2023:RJ-JP:27528]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1960/2022
Shankar Giri Goswami S/o Late Shri Ram Giri Goswami, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Plot No. 6-A, Shriman Nagar, Beelwa, Tehsil Sanganer, Ditrict Jaipur (Raj). Present Work Place Institutional Plot No.3, Near S.d.m Court, Ramsinghpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Raj).
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Order
07/10/2023
No one appears for the petitioner.
The petitioner has approached this Court for issuing direction for fair and impartial investigation of FIR No.461/2021 registered with Police Station Malpura Gate, Sanganer Jaipur (East) for offences under Sections 147, 148, 380, 452, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 427 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 3 and 25 of Arms Act.
Learned Magistrate has ample power under the Code of Criminal Procedure to monitor fair investigation of a case and The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently stated that instead of invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of The Constitution of India or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the aggrieved person should
[2023:RJ-JP:27528]
[CRLMP-1960/2022]
(2 of 3)
approach the learned Magistrate itself who has got ample power under Cr.P.C to do the needful.
In Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in AIR 2008 SC 907, the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated in para 27 as follows:-
“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.”
The aforesaid view was reiterated in Sudhir Bhaskarrao
Rao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and Ors . reported in 2016 (6) SCC 277.
Again in M. Subramaniam and Anr. Vs. S. Janaki and Anr. reported in 2020 (16) SCC 728, a three Judges Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated the view taken in Sakiri Vasu (supra).
Considering the fact that the petitioner is not remediless for redressal of his grievance, this court is not inclined to entertain this petition. The petitioner may approach the Magistrate concerned.
[2023:RJ-JP:27528]
[CRLMP-1960/2022]
(3 of 3)
With the aforesaid observation, the instant petition stands disposed of.
If the petitioner approaches the Magistrate concerned, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall proceed according to law expeditiously.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J
Ashwani/-558
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this Court should entertain a petition seeking fair investigation when the remedy lies with 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.Distinguished¶22
AIR 2008 SC 907 · Who else cites this
Sudhir Bhaskarrao Rao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and OrsExplained¶24
2016 (6) SCC 277 · Who else cites this
M. Subramaniam and Anr. Vs. S. Janaki and Anr.Applied¶26
2020 (16) SCC 728 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Shankar Giri Goswami
State Of Rajasthan
Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur
Sho Ps Malpura Gate
Birendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
