IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-15310 of 2010 Date of decision : 24.5.2010 Swaraj Jit Kaur …. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. Harnek Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. *** S.S. SARON, J. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC for registration of FIR against respondents No.4 to 8 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 498-A, 506 and 120-B IPC in Police Station, Division No.5, Ludhiana. A further prayer has been made for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to take action against respondents No.4 to 8 and the articles as mentioned in the body of the petition be delivered to the petitioner. The petitioner was married to Raj Kumar (respondent No.4) on 28.3.2004. It is alleged that the parents of petitioner spent huge amount on her marriage and gave various articles. Now, matrimonial dispute has arisen and despite a complaint having been lodged and a representation (Annexure P2) submitted to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana (respondent No.2), there has Crl. Misc. No. M-15310 of 2010 [2] been complete inaction in registering a FIR. Therefore, it is prayed that FIR may be registered. It is well known that in case the petitioner is aggrieved against the inaction on the part of the police in not registering a FIR she is to avail her other remedies in accordance with law. This Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is normally not to issue any direction for registration of FIR. In Aleque Padamsee and others v. Union of India and others, (2007) 6 SCC 171 (SC), it was observed that the correct position in law is that the Police officials are to register a FIR whenever the facts brought to the notice show that cognizable offence has been made out. In case the Police officials fail to do so, the modalities to be adopted are set out in Section 190 read with Section 200 CrPC. Therefore, if a person is aggrieved by the inaction of Police officials in registering the FIR, the modalities contained in Section 190 read with Section 200 CrPC are to be adopted and followed. In Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP and others, 2008 (1) RCR (Crl.) 392 (SC) it was observed by the Supreme Court that if a person has a grievance that the Police Station is not registering his FIR under Section 154 CrPC, then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC by an application in writing. Even if that does not lead to any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is not registered or even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file such application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Crl. Misc. No. M-15310 of 2010 [3] Section 156(3) CrPC is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered and can also direct proper investigation to be made in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. However, a petition under Section 482 CrPC for directing the registration of a FIR is to be done only in some rare and some exceptional cases. In the present case, the petitioner has her remedy of approaching the Magistrate in case there is any inaction on the part of the Police in not registering the FIR. The present is not a case which would warrant the issuance of directions by this Court for registration of a FIR. In the circumstances, the petitioner if so advised, may avail her other remedies as available to her in accordance with law. The Crl. Misc. petition is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE May 24, 2010 amit