HIGH OURTs-QF G BI WRIT PETITION (Cr) No. 6133 of2008 Siddharth Singh S/ Rakesing aged about 22 yes, enhanbad, . Citwwli Raipur, istrict Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS :1. State of Chhauisgam Through ~ The Secretary, Department of Home wai D.K.S. hawan, Raipur (C.G. 2. Direcor General of Police Director Genera 0&o, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintendent of Police, 0$c o Superintendent ofPolice, Raipur (C.G.) 4. Station Hous ' Omce Poc tio e V r; lie ,mn Khamtarai, Raipu, District — Raipur (C.G.) 5. L&T Finance Ltd. Through - Manager, 80 Swastik Chamber, 8 o, S R hebu, a. . Fice Mager, Circle Ofice, L&T Finance Ltd. Nagpur, Plot No. 316, MG. House 4““ Floor, Ravndranath Tagore Road, ivi ine, Nr 7. ecovery/arkeing Manager, L&T ance RMt Fin 2“ loor, Ndu g, Raipur ( 8. Ragh Aenc, Throughz- L&T Finance Ltd, 2““ Floor, Naidu Building, Jai Road, Raipur C.G.) 9. Umon f na, Tinough ~ Secretary ti Department ofFmance Delhi WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION W INDIA r g, m Flor CT oadi; Cmr Mumbi 6 nan an , i Ci L agpu C CHHATTISARH AT LASPUR PETITIONER o hLSh, ar Psa PS. ys-Kth, D RESPONDENTS ts, B ) t , l e e f Ltd “ F ai Buildin Jail Road, CG) unath gy l ( o Idi x ,_ SB: Hon’bleslm Satish K. Agxmmm, J. ‘ Shri Amit Shanna, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General for the State/ respondent No. l to 4. Shri S.K.Beriwa1, Standing Counsel for the Union of India. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 05E day of November; 2008) The petitioner is aggieved by the order dated 01.09.2008 whereby the complaint lodged by the petitioner under section 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.) has been rejected. The petitioner has alternative statutory remedy by taking recourse to judicial forum as available under the provisions oflaw. Thispetition tiled under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 and 9’to register F.I.R. against the respondents 5 to 8 cannot be considered at this stage. Law is very clear that if the petitioner has any grievance against some persons, the petitioner may lodge F.IR and thereaiter, may take recourse to the complaint under the provisions of section 190 read with section 200 to 203 ofthe Cr.P.C. In View ofthe foregoing, without expressing any opinion on merits ofthe /),. case, the petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. . ,i/r’” 0t“ Sdl- Satish K. Agni“ Judge /,