Dismissed

Vimla Meena W/O Kamlesh Kumar Meena, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Apr 2023CRLMP/445/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous petition, the petitioner sought direction for fair investigation and a change of agency in an FIR. The court held that the Magistrate has ample powers to monitor investigations and that the aggrieved person should approach the Magistrate under Cr.P.C. remedies rather than filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Consequently, the petition was d

What did the court decide?

Transfer of investigation was refused and the petition was disposed of with direction to approach the concerned Magistrate.

Vimla Meena W/O Kamlesh Kumar Meena, Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/007141]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 445/2023

¶4

Vimla Meena W/o Kamlesh Kumar Meena, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 941-A Old Railway Colony Kota At Present A-24, Ridhi Sidhi Nagar, Rangpur Road, Rangpur, Kota-324002.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Bhardwaj For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR Order

¶11

19/04/2023

¶12

Heard the parties.

¶13

The petitioner has approached this court for issuing direction for fair investigation and change of investigation agency in FIR No.0379/2022 registered with Police Station Kotwali Bundi, District-Bundi for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC.

¶14

Learned Magistrate has ample powers 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 approach the learned Magistrate itself who has got ample power under Cr.P.C to do the needful.

[2023/RJJP/007141]

[CRLMP-1445/2023]

(2 of 3)

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:-

¶19

“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.”

¶20

The aforesaid view was reiterated in Sudhir Bhaskarrao

¶21

Rao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and Ors . reported

¶22

in 2016 (6) SCC 277.

¶23

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).

¶24

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.

¶25