In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc.-M No.5718 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:2.3.2009 Paramjit Kaur .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Karanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C.' - for short) for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to register a FIR against respondents No.4 to 7 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 392, 452 and 34 Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the petitioner on the date of occurrence i.e. 31.12.2008 submitted an application (Annexure-P.1) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar (respondent No.2) complaining about the beating caused by respondents No.4 to 7 and also regarding the fact that her gold chain and ear rings (weighing 20 grams each) which the petitioner was wearing were missing. It is submitted that respondents No.4 to 7 entered into a compromise with the petitioner and they are not fulfilling the compromise with her. The petitioner then again approached S.H.O., B- Division, Amritsar (respondent No.3) vide representation dated 25.1.2009 (Annexure-P.2). However, despite that no action is being taken by the Cr. Misc.-M No.5718/2009 [2] Police. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the primary contention of the petitioner is for registration of a FIR against respondents No.4 to 7. 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 failed to do so, the modalities to be adopted are set out in Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C. Therefore, if a person is aggrieved by the inaction of the Police officials in registering the FIR, the modalities contained in Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C are to be adopted and followed. In Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others, 2008 (1) RCR (Cr.) 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 Cr.P.C., then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. 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) Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 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, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for directing the registration of a FIR is to be done only in some rare and Cr. Misc.-M No.5718/2009 [3] some exceptional cases. In the present case, the petitioner has his 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 his other remedies as available to him in accordance with law. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. March 2, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*