IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 308 of 2010 Smt. Sapna Negi …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents Mr. Raman Kumar Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State. Dated 30th April, 2010 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents no. 1 and 2 to transfer the case of the petitioner to any other investigating agency within the territorial jurisdiction of Nainital in the light of the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital on 03.03.2010. We have heard Mr. Raman Kumar Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents and perused the record. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital on 03.03.2010, the police/investigating agency has not proceeded with the matter at all. With the result the petitioner lost the faith to the Investigating Officer, hence, this petition. We do not find any justification to issue any writ of mandamus directing the respondents to transfer the case to any other investigating agency merely on the ground that the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital dated 2 03.03.2010 has not been complied with. The petitioner has so many alternative remedies by filing the contempt petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital alleging therein that his order has not been complied with or by moving a representation before the State Government/ Director General of Police, Uttarakhand/Senior Superintendent of Police, Nainital for transfer of the case to any other investigating agency, if the petitioner does not have any faith in the present Investigating Agency. This Court generally is not going to invoke its jurisdiction in transferring the matter from one investigating agency to another. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) (B.C. Kandpal, J.) VKG 30.04.2010