ORDER :

1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondent no.3 be directed to register an FIR as per the complaint given by him against the accused named therein.

2. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Dharmesh Gurjar appearing for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. Dabhi for the respondent – State of Gujarat.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has referred to the written complaint dated 17.02.2021 given by the petitioner before the Police Inspector, Vadaj Police Station i.e. the respondent no.3 herein. However, grievance of the petitioner is that though sufficient time has been passed, till date it has not been registered and, therefore, appropriate direction be issued.

4. Learned APP has opposed this petition. He has placed reliance upon the order dated 17.12.2020 passed by this Court in Special Criminal Application No.6760/2020. It is submitted that as per the said order, the petition is having alternative remedy of filing private complaint before the concerned Magistrate Court.

5. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and having gone through the material placed on record, it has emerged that the petitioner has submitted written complaint dated 17.12.2020 before the Police Inspector, Vadaj Police Station and same has not been registered as FIR by the respondent no.3.

6. This Court has considered similar issue while deciding Special Criminal Application No.6760/2020 as per order dated 17.12.2020, wherein this Court has observed in Para Nos.3 to 7 as under,

“3. At this stage, it would be apposite to incorporate the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of M. Subramaniam v. S. Janki dated 20.03.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.102 of 2011. The Apex Court has observed thus;-

“5. While it is not possible to accept the contention of the appellants on the question of locus standi, we are inclined to accept the contention that the High Court could not have directed the registration of an FIR with a direction to the police to investigate and file the final report in view of the judgment of this Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Others in which it has been inter alia held as under:

“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 of 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 (2008) 2 SCC 409 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.

12. Thus in Mohd. Yousuf v. Afaq Jahan this Court observed: (SCC p. 631, para 11)

“11. The clear position therefore is that any Judicial Magistrate, before taking cognizance of the offence, can order investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code. If he does so, he is not to examine the complainant on oath because he was not taking cognizance of any offence therein. For the purpose of enabling the police to start investigation it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR. There is nothing illegal in doing so. After all registration of an FIR involves only the process of entering the substance of the information relating to the commission of the cognizable offence in a book kept by the officer in charge of the police station as indicated in Section 154 of the Code. Even if a Magistrate does not say in so many words while directing investigation