WP(C) 6567/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE U B SAHA The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a direc tion to the respondents to register a criminal case against one Md. Bakkar Ali w ho is shown as accused in the complaint of the petitioner filed before the learn ed Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, which was subsequently forwarded to the Of ficer-in-Charge, Boko Police Station. Heard Mr. BK Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G.Soren, le arned Govt. Advocate for the respondents. Considering the prayer of the petitioner made in the writ petition and a s agreed to by the learned counsel of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the motion stage itself. The fact of the case, in brief, is as follows :- The petitioner, a poor widow living with her minor children at Roumari ( Patolipara) under Boko Police Station, District-Kamrup was raped by one Bakkar A li in her house on 4.11.2010. She reported the above incident to the Boko Police Station, but the same was not accepted by the said police station, failing whic h she filed a complaint case in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup and the learned CJM on 11.11.2010 dire cted the Boko Police Station to register the case of the petitioner and investig ate the same. Even after the direction of the learned CJM, the Boko Police Stati on has not registered case against the aforesaid accused, as a result, the petit ioner was moving from door to door for getting justice and ultimately she filed the instant writ petition. It is pleaded in the writ petition that on feeling insult all the relatives of t he said Bakkar Ali are behind the petitioner. They have lurked her house in her absence and taken away a number of valuables and till today they are searching h er for physical assault to take revenge. Mr. Das while urging for the relief sought for would contend that a citizen has the right to get justice from the State and the O/C. of a Police Station is boun d to record the information relating to a cognizable offence and investigate the same, which is missing in the instant case due to non-action of the O/C. of the Boko Police Station. Mr. Soren fairly submits that when the allegation is serious in nature, it was t he duty of the Officer-in-Charge of Boko Police Station to register a case and i nvestigate the same, but at the same time, he points out that when the Boko Poli ce Station refused to register the case of the petitioner then she should have m oved the Superintendent of Police, Kamrup District who could himself took up the investigation or could direct an officer, subordinate to him to investigate the crime. In Shashikant vrs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others [(2007) 1 SCC 630] and Rajinder Singh Katoch vrs. Chandigarh Admn. And others [2007) 10 SCC 69] si milar question came up before the Apex Court for consideration. In Shashikant (s upra), the Apex Court held that a writ court ordinarily would not interfere with the functioning of an investigative agency. Only in exceptional cases, it may d o so. In Rajinder Singh Katoch (supra), the Apex Court noted, inter alia, that Althoug h the officer in charge of a police station is legally bound to register a first information report in terms of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, i f the allegations made by them give rise to an offence which can be investigated without obtaining any permission from the Magistrate concerned, the same by its elf, however, does not take away the right of the competent officer to make a pr eliminary enquiry, in a given case, in order to find out as to whether the first information sought to be lodged had any substance or not. In this case, the aut horities had made investigations into the matter. In fact, the Superintendent of Police himself has, pursuant to the directions issued by the High Court, invest igated into the matter and visited the sport in order to find out the truth in t he complaint of the petitioner from the neighbours. It appears from Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ’the Co de’) that an Officer-in-Charge of a police Station is legally bound to register a first information report when such information is relating to cognizable offen ce, but at the same time a competent officer has also the right to make a prelim inary enquiry in a given case in order to find out whether the first information report lodged before him has any substance or not. Sub-Section (3) of Section 1 54 of the Code also empowers an aggrieved person to take up his grievance with t he Superintendent of Police of the concerned District and if the Superintendent of Police is satisfied with the information, inter alia, that the same is relati ng to a cognizable offence then he himself can take up the investigation or can direct an officer subordinate to him to investigate the said allegation in the m anner provided by the Code and such officer shall have all the powers of an Offi cer-in-Charge of a police station in relation to that offence. As this court is going to dispose of the instant writ petition at the motion sta ge, it would not be proper to make any observation against the Officer-in-Charge of Boko Police Station without providing him any opportunity to place his case. But as admittedly the petitioner did not approach the Superintendent of Police of her District, this court is of the considered opinion that it would meet just ice if the instant writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :- The learned Govt. Advocate shall transmit a copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition including all Annexures, particularly Annexure-1, i.e. the complaint lodged by the petitioner before the learned CJM, Kamrup to the Superi ntendent of Police, Kamrup (Rural), Guwahati, Kamrup, respondent No.2 herein, an d on receipt of the same the Superintendent of Police shall treat the said compl aint as the first information report and register the same and consequent theret o shall initiate an investigation either by himself or by an officer subordinate to him so that the petitioner should not be deprived from getting justice as gu aranteed by the Constitution of India as well as the provisions of the Code. If it is found on enquiry that the O/C., Boko Police Station refused to register th e first information at the instance of either of the accused or his relatives wh ose names have been mentioned in para 9 of the writ petition then necessary lawf ul steps should be taken against the officer concerned for whom the petitioner f ailed to get justice in proper time. Order accordingly. Registry is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the learned Govt. Advoca te. Registry shall also forward a copy of this order to the Director General of Police, Assam for his information and necessary action. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.