- (1.) THE present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking direction to respondents No. 1 to 3 to register FIR against respondents No. 4 to 7 for commission of offences of cheating, forgery and breach of trust etc. and for quashing of order dated 27.11.2013, Annexure P5 vide which respondent No. 2 has approved the report dated 23.11.2013 submitted by respondent No. 3. Heard.
(2.) IT has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner that police has refused to register the FIR on wrong assertion that dispute is civil in nature whereas, criminal case is made out and that police is bound to register the criminal case against respondents No. 4 to 7 for the alleged commission of offences. He has also placed reliance upon Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. and others, 2013 4 RCR(Cri) 979 and Guru Granth Saheb Sthan Meerghat Vanaras v. Ved Prakash and others, 2013 2 RCR(Cri) 947. However, for getting registered an FIR, petitioner is having alternate remedy to approach the Illaqa Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. if any cognizable offence is made out as has been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., 2007 5 LawHerald(SC) 3910. Relevant paragraphs reads as under: - 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 registration 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. 25. We have elaborated on the above matter because we often find that when someone has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered at the police station and/or a proper investigation is not being done by the police, he rushes to the High Court to file a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not encourage this practice and should ordinarily refuse to interfere in such matters, and relegate the petitioner to his alternating remedy, firstly under Section 154(3) and Section 36 Cr.P.C. before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the concerned Magistrate 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 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. Hence, in view of the aforementioned legal proposition, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to approach learned Illaqa Magistrate.;