In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc.-M No.8786 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:30.3.2009 Harmesh Singla .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Kehar Singh Hissowal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C.' - for short) has been filed for directing the official respondents to take action against the private respondents against whom FIR No.81 dated 24.11.2008 has been registered for the offences under Sections 382 and 34 IPC at Police Station Bareta, District Mansa. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite registration of FIR dated 24.11.2008 (Annexure-P.2) the Police is not taking any action against the culprits. The Police has, however, taken action on a complaint filed by the private respondents against the petitioner. It is submitted that on the morning of 12.11.2008, the petitioner was distributing newspapers from door to door. The private respondents snatched the newspapers from the petitioner and other items like watch etc. They gave a beating to the petitioner and he was insulted by the private respondents. His bicycle is also stated to have been stolen. However, the official respondents are taking no action on the complaint. Cr. Misc.-M No.8786/ 2009 [2] After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 (1) RCR (Cr.) 392 (SC) it was observed by the Supreme Court that Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of a FIR and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the Police. Even in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal, A.I.R. 1992 S.C. 604 it has been observed that a Magistrate is kept in the picture at all stages of the police investigation although he is not authorized to interfere with the actual investigation or to direct the police how the investigation is to be conducted. However, in case the investigating authorities transgress the circumscribed limits of their jurisdiction and improperly and illegally exercise their investigatory powers in breach of any statutory provision causing serious prejudice to the personal liberty and also property of a citizen, then the Court on being approached by the person aggrieved for the redressal of any grievance has to consider the nature and extent of the breach and pass appropriate orders as may be called for without leaving the citizens to the mercy of police echelons since human dignity is a dear value of our Constitution. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner in the first instance may approach the Illaqa Magistrate for the redressal of his grievances regarding inaction by the Police officials in not carrying out proper investigation. It is needless to submit that if such an application is made, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law. Cr. Misc.-M No.8786/ 2009 [3] The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. March 30, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*