Crl. Misc. No. M-6353 of 2011 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-6353 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 1, 2011 Paramjit Singh ............................................................... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...................................... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Avtar S. Khinda, Advocate for the petitioner. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the present petition to enable him to approach the authorities under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as per decision of the Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P and others 2008 (1) RCR (Criminal) 392 wherein the observations of the Supreme Court 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 Crl. Misc. No. M-6353 of 2011 (O&M) [ 2 ] 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.PC 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 police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156 (3) Cr.PC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.PC.” Allowed as prayed for. Dismissed as withdrawn. 1.3.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE