Crl. Misc. No. M-35599 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** Crl. Misc. No. 35599 of 2010 Date of decision : 03.12.2010 Balwinder Singh -----Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others -----Respondents Present:- Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner. --- S.S.SARON, J (Oral) :- The present petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for directing respondents No. 1 to 3 to conduct an inquiry in respect of representations dated 29.10.2010 (Annexure P-1), 30.10.2010 (Annexure P-2), 2.11.2010 (Annexure P-3) and 16.11.2010 (Annexure P-4), submitted before respondents No. 2 and 3 and for registration of a FIR against respondents No. 4 to 10 under sections 452,506,323,427,447,34 IPC. A further prayer has been made for protecting the life and liberty of the petitioner from private respondents No. 4 to 10. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, it may be noticed that the grievance of the petitioner is that there has been inaction on the part of the respondents No. 2 and 3 for not registering a FIR against respondents No. 4 to 10. Be that as it may. It is well known that in case the petitioner is aggrieved against the inaction on the part of the police in not registering a FIR, he has to avail his remedies in accordance with law and this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is normally not to Crl. Misc. No. M-35599 of 2010 -2- issue directions for registration of a FIR. In Aleque Padamsee and others vs. 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 its notice show that a cognizable offence has been made out. In case the Police officials fail 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 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 UP and others, 2008(1) RCR (Crl.) 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 an 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, a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for directing the registration of a FIR is to be done only in some rare and 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. Crl. Misc. No. M-35599 of 2010 -3- In the circumstances, the petitioner if so advised, may avail his other remedies as available to him in accordance with law. The Crl. Misc. petition is accordingly disposed of. (S.S.SARON) JUDGE December 03, 2010 Gurpreet