WP(C) 2492/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE U.B. SAHA The petitioner is a businessman having 7-Bigha 4-katha 14-lecha of land within his full possession covered by Dag No.12 of Periodic Patta No.47, Dag No.3 of Periodic Patta No. 49 and Dag Nos. 1,2 & 4 of Periodic Patta No. 50 in village No.2 Naoholia, under Tipling Mouza, of Tengaghat Revenue Circle has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent No.5, the Officer-in- Charge of the Naoholia Police outpost to treat the Ejahar of the petitioner wher ein he made the same complain against the group of persons, namely Sri Kamal Das , Sri Asim Das and few others of village No. 2 of Naoholia suddenly entered into his land and forcefully tried to occupy a portion of the land and registered th e same as a police case and also for investigation thereto for taking appropriat e action against the miscreants. Heard Mr. P.K. Barman, learned counsel appearing for the petitio ner as well as Mr. G. Soren learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of t he respondents, who contends that the present writ petition is not maintainable in view of the sub-Section (3) of Section 154 Cr.P.C. as the petitioner has no a lternative remedy i.e. if any person aggrieved by refusal on the part of an Offi cer-in-Charge of a Police Station to record an information referred to in Sub-Se ction 154 of Cr.P.C the same substance in writing to be sent to the Superintende nt of Police and being it a prosecution of cognizable offence, Superintendent of Police shall investigate the case by himself or investigation to be made by any Officer subordinate to him in a manner provided by the Criminal Procedure Code and as such, Officer shall have power to investigate in relation to that offence . On the other hand, Mr. Barman learned counsel submits that the Ejahar alleged by the petitioner discloses the cognizable offence and the Officer-in-Charge who se duty is to treat the Ejahar as an FIR and register the same as a police case. This Court has gone through the submission of the learned counse l of both the parties as well as the provisions of Section 154 of the Criminal P rocedure Code. According to this Code, though the Court has power to issue a Wri t directing the Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station to treat the complain of a citizen when such complain/petition discloses a cognizable offence but normally the Court should not utilize such power. The person aggrieved by refusal on the part of an Officer to record the information and/or treat the Ejahar as FIR sho uld normally first approach the Superintendent of Police under whose jurisdictio n the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station is working and only on refusal by the Superintendent of Police of the station, the Writ Court should be approached . Here in this case, admitted position is that the petitioner befo re approaching the Superintendent of police, Dibrugarh approach this Court by fi ling this writ petition. Therefore, ends of justice would be made if the instant writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to send a cop y of Ejahar directly to the Superintendent of Police, Dibrugarh who shall on rec eipt of the same examine the Ejahar (Complaint/petition) and if it is found that the said Ejahar discloses that commission of a cognizable offence then the Supe rintendent of Police, Dibrugarh shall treat the same as an Ejahar and investigat e the mater in accordance with sub-Section (3) of Section 154 of Cr.PC. The peti tioner, if so advised, may send the Ejahar to SP, Dibrugarh within one week alon g with this order. It is made clear that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the acti on of the Superintendent of Police, Dibrugarh then he is at liberty to approach this Court, if so advised. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.