Crl. Misc. No.M-29469 of 2010 ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-29469 of 2010 Date of decision: 05.10.2010 Baljeet Singh .. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others. .. Respondents Present:- Mr.Harish Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * * S.S. SARON, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for handing over investigation of case FIR No.146 dated 14.06.2007 (Annexure P-1) registered at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana, for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC to some independent agency i.e. Central Bureau of Investigation as SHO, Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana (respondent No.3), is said to be hand in glove with the accused, who are roaming freely despite the fact that they are specifically named in the FIR. Further prayer has been made for directing the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana (respondent No.2) to conduct an inquiry as to how and under what circumstances, SHO, Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana (respondent No.3) has not arrested the accused. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, it may be noticed that the primary grievance of the petitioner is that effective and complete investigations are not being carried out in FIR (Annexure P-1), therefore, the matter is liable to be inquired into and investigated by the higher Police Officer. It may be noticed that in Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP Crl. Misc. No.M-29469 of 2010 ::2:: and others, 2008(1) RCR (Crl.) 392, it was observed by the Supreme Court that Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation and it includes the power to order registration of a FIR and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the Police. Even in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal AIR 1992 SC 604, it has been observed that a Magistrate is kept in the picture at all stages of the police investigation although he is not authorized to interfere with the actual investigation or to direct the police how the investigation is to be conducted. However, in case the investigating authorities transgress the circumscribed limits of their jurisdiction and improperly and illegally exercise their investigatory powers in breach of any statutory provision causing serious prejudice to the personal liberty and also property of a citizen, then the Court on being approached by the person aggrieved for the redressal of any grievance has to consider the nature and extent of the breach and pass appropriate orders as may be called for without leaving the citizens to the mercy of police echelons since human dignity is a dear value of our Constitution. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner in the first instance may approach the Ilaqa Magistrate for the redressal of his grievance regarding inaction by the Police Officials in not carrying out proper investigation. It is needless to submit that if such an application is made, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. (S.S. SARON) October 05, 2010 JUDGE sukhpreet