Crl. Misc.No.M-2954 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M-2954 of 2011 Date of Decision: 02.02.2011 Mamta ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 to 4 to take legal action against respondents No.6 and 7 on the complaint dated 02.10.2010 given by the petitioner regarding sending of petitioner's husband abroad, in accordance with Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. It is pointed out that the husband of the present petitioner was sent by respondent No.6 to Kuala lampur on the promise that he will get work permit there, whereas, he was sent on tourist visa. It is not disputed that the husband of the petitioner is presently in Kuala lampur. The petitioner appears to be aggrieved with the fact that her husband has not been granted work permit and his passport has also been retained by the wife of respondent No.6 who also resides in Kuala lampur. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. Crl. Misc.No.M-2954 of 2011 2 State of U.P. and others reported as 2008(2) Supreme Court Cases 409, held in para 27 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 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. In view of the above and taking into account the facts of the present case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy, if so advised and in accordance with law. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 02.02.2011 JUDGE gurpreet