Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Md. Shamim S/o Jainul Abdin – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard, Mr. Afaque Rashidi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Raman, learned counsel for the respondent-State.
2. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
3. Petitioner has filed this instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction upon the respondents to lodge F.I.R. on the basis of written complaint made by the petitioner.
4. Grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of written submission of the petitioner, F.I.R. has not been lodged.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is right of the petitioner to lodge F.I.R. and the respondents are liable to lodge F.I.R. which has not been done in the hand in hand.
6. Mr. Aditya Raman, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that approaching the Hon’ble High Court by filing application under Article 226 of the Constitution is not an appropriate remedy. He submits that a proceeding und
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the remedy for non-registration of F.I.R. lies with the complainant to approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., as per the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appropriate remedy for F.I.R. non-registration is to approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., as established by relevant case....
The main legal point established is that the High Court should not ordinarily interfere in cases of non-registration of F.I.R., and the appropriate remedy lies in approaching the Magistrate under Sec....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the High Court cannot issue a direction for registration of an FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the aggrieved person sh....
Availability of alternative efficacious remedy under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for seeking the registration of an FIR.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the remedy for FIR registration lies under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and not through a writ petition.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when a person has a grievance regarding the lodging of an FIR or the conduct of a proper investigation, the remedy lies in approaching the Mag....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
