s JN THE MGH COUfiT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.rCrlNo. '5.9X& ZIQ PETmQNER y: ^ys^^'' ,&«•' ^-1 -^,\^, \--' .&•'^ Smt. Shobha Pathak W/o Upendra Pathak , Aged about 36 years , R/o Kapu Raod , Pathal goan , Distt. Raigarh {C.G.j VERSUS RESPONDENTS y ^^,se--'WWtl^^ jr^'<CA,—^,A.'& 5 -'^^Si.SSBrt';a 1 I ^swfs^i'aey ^ | il.^v " ' ASr/ ^ 1. StateofChhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Home, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur [C.G.] ^- 2. The Supritandant of Police Jashpur ,Distt. Jashpur [ C.G.] 3. The Station House Officer ,Thana Pathalgaon, Distt. Jashpur [C.G.] WRIT PETITION A/U 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 111. € PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (Cr.) No. 3210 of 2010 Smt. Shobha PathA VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFJNDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri, J. Present: Shri Neelkanth Malaviya, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 05th day of July, 2010) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made an application on 26.11.2009 (Annexure P/l) to the Superintendent of Police, District Jashpur, seeking a du'ection to take appropriate action against the offenders after making investigation. However, no action has been taken till date by the police authorities. 2. The Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & others , while considering the situation wherein the police station or the Superintendent of Police has failed to perform their duties, observed as under: "11. In this connection we would like to state 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 yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is still not registered, or that even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., before the learned Magistrate concerned. Ifsuch an^application under Section 156(3) is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered and also can direct a proper investigation to be -——-^^i20a8i2_SCC 409 ^BB'aaa^. •f^v^ '%, ~':"^& g *.. ~'I / %,^%.^^/ "•^^.^' made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under the same provision monitor the investigatioa to ensure a proper investigation." Admittedly, the petitioner has not taken recourse to the provisions of section 156(3) ofthe Cr.P.C. by making an application to the Magistrate concemed for appropriate action on the complaints of the petitioner. Thus, at this stage, it would not be proper to interfere with the matter in exercise of writ jurisdiction when the proper arid effective forum of making an application/complaint before the magistrate under the provisions ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure, is available. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate steps as advised under the provisions of law in the light of the legal propositions as laid down by the Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu (supra). Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge