In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-33270 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:17.11.2010 Braham Chetan .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C. - for short) has been filed for directing respondents No.1 and 2 to take appropriate action in accordance with law and to register a case against respondents No.3 to 16 who, it is alleged, are interfering in the peaceful possession and occupation of the petitioner and have been making attempt to take forcible possession of the Dera and its properties. It is submitted that the petitioner is Coordinator of Mahesh Mukti Dham Ashram, which is duly registered vide registration No.1120 at Village Chak Radhewala Hall, Tehsil Abohar, District Ferozepur. It is alleged that the respondents with an intent to take forcible possession of the property of the ashram and hand it over to certain others have connived with ASI Sohan Lal, Chowki In-charge and thereafter they illegally took the petitioner and confined him into custody without registering any case in an illegal manner. One of the devotees of the petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No.165 of 2010 titled Devi Lal v. State of Punjab and this Court Cr. Misc. No.M-33270 of 2010 [2] appointed a Warrant Officer to raid the Police post. It is submitted that the Warrant Officer was harassed by ASI Sohan Lal who misbehaved with him. The petitioner was found in illegal confinement and after interference by the local persons, the Warrant Officer as well as the petitioner were released by ASI. The Warrant Officer then filed a report about the incident in this Court. Case FIR No.13 dated 26.1.2010 (Annexure-P.1) stands registered in this regard. The said case would take its due course. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that he is in possession of Mahesh Mukti Dham Ashram which, it is stated, is situated in Village Chak Radhewala Hall and as its Branch in Village Dhani Nainian Wali, Village Kandhwala Amarkot, Tehsil Abohar, District Ferozepur where respondents No.3 to 16 are attempting to take illegal possession. The petitioner has not submitted any document showing the foundation, title or possession of the petitioner. Only some photographs have been placed as Annexure-P.2 which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner show that the petitioner is in possession of the Dera. Besides, an application (Annexure-P.3) which is alleged to have been submitted to the SSP, Ferozepur on 28.7.2010, however, there is no diary number or other particulars of submitting the application. In any case, the primary relief that is sought is for registration of FIR against respondents No.3 to 16. In this regard, it may be noticed that the Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee and others v. Union of India and others, (2007) 6 SCC 171 (SC) has observed that the correct position in law is that the Police officials are to register a FIR whenever the facts brought to the notice show that cognizable offence has been made out. In case the Police officials failed to do so, the modalities to be adopted are set out in Section 190 read Cr. Misc. No.M-33270 of 2010 [3] with Section 200 Cr.P.C. Therefore, if a person is aggrieved by the inaction of the 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 U.P. and others, 2008 (1) RCR (Cr.) 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 such 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. This Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is normally not order registration of FIR. In the present case, as already noticed, there is nothing shown about any foundation or claim of title or possession of the petitioner. In the circumstances, the petitioner may avail his alternative remedies in accordance with law. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. Cr. Misc. No.M-33270 of 2010 [4] November 17, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*