IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 8129 of 2010 Date of decision: 02.11.2012 Teja Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. B.S. Sewak, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.S. Jattana, Addl.A.G. Punjab for the State. Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for respondent No. 3. ***** RANJIT SINGH J. No reply has been filed. Counsel for the petitioner complains that despite repeated opportunity, no reply is filed by the State. This is a case where the petitioner is aggrieved against the action of the Magistrate in treating the petition filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a private complaint. The grievance is that the petitioner would not be in any position to provide the material in support of the private complaint. The allegation being made against the police officer is that he had impersonated and had advanced threat to the Investigating Officer. If the petitioner is aggrieved against the action of the Magistrate in not following the proper procedure under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., the petitioner will have a remedy against that order. It will not be appropriate to invoke the Crl. Misc. No. M- 8129 of 2010 -2- jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu Versus State of U.P. and others AIR 2008 Supreme Court 907. The petitioner may have his alternative remedy as available under law, in case, he finds the action of the Magistrate not proper or not in accordance with law. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of. November 02, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE