113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] (O&M) Date of Decision: July 22, 2016 [ENTITY] Petitioner VERSUS The [ENTITY] and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH Present: Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioner. INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Petitioner has filed this petition under [SECTION] [ACT] against [ENTITY] and other respondents for directing respondents to conduct fair and impartial investigation in case FIR No.132 dated 05.05.2016 under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT] registered at Police Station Rania, District Sirsa.
At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner mainly argued on one point that investigation should be conducted fairly and impartially and he did not press other relief sought in the petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that investigation is not being conducted fairly and properly. As regarding this grievance that investigation is not being conducted fairly and properly, the petitioner has 1 of 2 the remedy to approach Illaqa Magistrate, who has ample powers to supervise and even monitor the investigation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT] has held that the petition under [SECTION] [ACT] should not be entertained in routine and it is held as under:-
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] [ACT] 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 [SECTION] and [SECTION] before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, under [SECTION] [ACT] before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under [SECTION] [ACT] and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under [SECTION] [ACT]
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."
The law laid down in above judgment has also been relied upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT].
As the petitioner has alternative remedies as stated in the above-said case, especially to approach the Judicial Magistrate, therefore, this petition cannot be entertained and the same is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate to avail alternative remedies.
July 22, 2016 ([ENTITY] JUDGE 2 of 2