CRM No. M 544 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 544 of 2011 Date of decision: 07.01.2011 Karandeep ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. P S Punia, Advocate for the petitioner -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing respondents No. 1 and 2 to register a case under Section 409 IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act for embezzlement of the public money against respondent No. 4 and to investigate the same. Section 156 (3) of the Criminal Code of Procedure, reads as under:- “156 (3) Any Magistrate empowered under Section 190 may order such an investigation as above mentioned.” The above provision shows that the Magistrate has the power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XII. Under Section 156 CRM No. M 544 of 2011 2 (3), the Magistrate is also empowered under Section 190 to order investigation and direct the registration of the FIR. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U P and others reported as 2008 (1) RCR (Criminal) 392, wherein, it is held that the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation, and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly. Para 27 and 28 of the aforesaid judgment are reproduced hereunder:- “27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation, and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 28. It is true that alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to a writ petition, but it is equally well settled that if there is an alternative remedy the High Court should not ordinarily interfere.” In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed with CRM No. M 544 of 2011 3 liberty to file a criminal complaint or to avail of any other alternative remedy which may be available in accordance with law. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 07.01.2011 mohan