IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT B,ILAsPUR (ca) w. PgggNo. 515E of 2011 g 13m” PETIUONER / : Vijay Kumar Mishra, aged about 43 year's, S/o Law’shr'i Kafanafh Mishra, R{o ViHage—Kharor'a, Ward No. 8, Thana & ,Up—TahsH—Khar'or'a, Dis‘rricf— Ra'ipur‘ (6.6.) ' VERSUS ESPONDENTS 1 SmTe of ChhaTTiSgarh Through ’ Secre’rar‘y, Deparfmem‘ of Home, Dou Kafyan Singh Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2, The Direcfor‘ Genehaf of Police“ Police Headquarfer, Roipur‘ (6.6.) (/3. Superintendent of Police, Raipur, DisfricT—Roipur‘ (C,G.) 4. Police S’ro’rion', Khar'or‘a, through The asmfion House Officer, Kharor‘a, Districf—Roipur‘ (C.G.) / 5. Deepak Agrawal, aged abouf 45 year‘s, W/o Ramlal Agrawal, R/o Tilda Road, Kharom, Police Sfafion (Ki Up—Tahsil— Kharor‘a, Districf-Raipur' (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R HIGH COI ERT OF CHHATTTSGARH AT B1} [ASWIR WRIT PETITEON (CL) No: 5259 QfZOIi ?ETITIONER : Vijay Kumar MiShra‘ VER ST 5S RESPONDENTS : State 0f Ckmmtisgarh It Others. WENT PETWION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITI TWON OF INDIA SB: Han’bie Shri Satish K. Annihotri. .1. Present Shri Bharat Rajput, Advocate for ihe petitimaer. Shri Arum Sao, Goveqmieni Advocate for the Sialefrespondmi No. I to 4. ORDER {Passed on GQWaay of September, 201 g) L€amed céunsei‘azapgaring i‘br ihs petitioner submits iha: aver: afier making several camplaints to the police anihoritics‘ tha poiiQe iS not. ragistsrmg any ELR agaimt the respondent N0: S whQ has theatened the petitioner and hie family, and haS further demolished a. part of his house, Be that as it may, section. £90 ofthe Code of Crimmai Procedme 1973 (for 3km? ‘Ihe Cede J973’) provides for redressai of grievance in euch a ease wherein the petitioner can make a eompiaint to the Magistrate to take cogegauce of the offemce and furthen under seetioe 156(3) of the Code: 1973, the Magistrate is foliy empowered to order an investigation ax mentioneii in other provisiorls of section 156 ofthe Code 1973" 3. The Supreme Court, ir: Sekz‘rz‘ Vega v. State 0f UP. sf: ethers 1 , While considering the situation wherein the police statioo or the Superintendent of Poiice has faiier‘; to perform their duties$ observed as under: ”11. in ti‘m connection we would like to smite fhat if a pereon has a grievance that ihe poiiee staiion is not registering his FIR under Section i54- CLPICS, then he can approach the Suoerintendent of Police under Section 154$) CLRCN ivy an application in wriiing. Even if Eliaé Lioes riot yieid'any satisfactory result in the sense - U ?hai either the FIR is Still mt. mgistered; ar' that evsn wet registering it no proper invastigation N held; it. i3 opeu to the aggrieved person to me an appiicaiien under Saction 156(3) Cilia béfore ths Earned Magistrate concemedf If such an application under Sectian 156(3) is filed before the Magisirate, “me Magistrate can direat ms FIR to bs regiaered and aéso can c’iirect a proper investigation to be made, ii} a casg where? according 1:0 the aggisvgd person, no proper investigaiion was made. Th5 Magistrate can also umier 1315 sam¢ provisitm maniior the invastigation to msure a proper investigation.” Admiitevjly, the petitioner hae net taken recenrse m the yrovisions of eectien 156(3) of the (.1r.I’.Cu by making an apelication 10 the Magistrate coneemed for appropriate action en the comylaims of ihe petitioner, Thug at. this stage it wouid no: be proper in interfere with the matter in exercise of writ jurisdiction when ihe preper aiid effective fomm of makirig an apyiicatiem’eomyiaim before the magistrate under the provisiom of tile Code of Crimimi Procedure, is available, Thusg without. exgressing any opinion on the merits ofthe ease: the petition is dismissed reserving iibei'ty to the petitioiier to take recourse to the aforestaied provisions of law, if so advised" If such a, eomelaint is made before the jmiediotionai Magistrate: it is expected that me same Shall be deait. with expeditiousiy in accordance with law: on its own merit i Satish K. Agnihotri 3 Judge Sd/-