SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(MP) 1113

HEMANT GUPTA, VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Dharmendra Sonkar – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant: Ahadulla Usmani
For the Respondents: Amit Seth

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT GUPTA, CJ.

The challenge in the present intra-Court appeal is to an order passed by the learned Single Bench on 23-6-2017 in W.P. No. 8044/2017 whereby in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Shweta Bhadauria v. State of M.P., 2016 MPU Online 28 : 2017 (1) MPJR 247, it was held that if an FIR is not registered on the basis of a complaint which discloses a cognizable offence, the remedy available to an aggrieved person is to take recourse to the provisions envisaged under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (For short “the Code”).

2. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the judgment rendered in Shweta Bhadoria (supra) is not correctly decided, as in the case of Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P., 2013 MPU Online (S.C.) 4 : (2014) 2 SCC 1 the Supreme Court held that registration of an FIR is the mandatory duty of the police. Therefore, to ensure that the mandatory duty is carried by the Police, the interference of this Court is essential to secure rule of law. The relevant extract of the Constitution Bench judgment in Lalita Kumari (supra) read thus:

“120. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold : 120.1 R




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top