The importance of following the prescribed procedure under the law before approaching the High Court and the applicability of the legal provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Siddharth Mridul, J.

Crl.M.A. No. 4239/2016 (Exemption)

1. Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P. (CRL.) 757/2016

1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to the police to register a criminal case against respondent nos. 3 to 8 herein.

2. Notice.

3. Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned Addl. Standing Counsel (Crl.) accepts notice on behalf of the official respondent and has handed over a status report in the matter. The same is taken on record.

4. Although the commission of the offence is alleged to have taken place on 29th February, 2016, it is an admitted position that the petitioners did not immediately approach the police authorities in this behalf.

5. Interestingly, the first time the petitioners took any action in this behalf was when a representation dated 4th March, 2016, admittedly drafted by the petitioners’ lawyer on their instructions, was dispatched to the police authorities by post.

6. A perusal of the status report reveals that petitioner no. 1 is stated to be an alcoholic who has a propensity to disturb his neighbours after consuming alcohol. It is further stated in the status report filed on behalf of the SHO, Police Station- Nihal Vihar, Delhi that the said petitioner is not co-operating in the inquiry into the alleged incident.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners relies on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumari vs. State NCT of Delhi & Ors. reported as AIR 2006 SC 1322 in order to buttress his submission to urge that it is mandatory for the concerned officer to register a case on the basis of an information disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence.

8. In this behalf, it is suffice to observe that in Ramesh Kumari (supra), the complaint was directed against a police officer and it was considered appropriate, in the facts and circumstances thereof, and in the interest of justice, by the Supreme Court to refer the investigation to an independent agency like the CBI.

9. In a landmark decision of the Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. & Ors. reported as (2008) 2 SCC 409, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was concerned with the vexed question of whether it would be appropriate for the High Court to interfere in matters concerning non-registration of an FIR.

10. The Supreme Court delineated the scope and the ambit of interference by the High Court thus:-

“11. In this connection we would like to state that if a person has a grievance that the police station is not registering his FIR under Section 154 CrPC, then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC by an application in writing. Even if that does not yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is still not registered, or that even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Section 156(3) is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered and also can direct a proper investigation to be made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under the same provision monitor the investigation to ensure a proper investigation.

xxxxxx

17. In our opinion Section 156(3) CrPC is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an FIR and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Section 156(3) CrPC, though briefly worded, in our opinion, is very wide and it will include all such incidental powers as are necessary for en