ORDER

1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondents to take cognizance of the matter on an application filed by the petitioner and take action against the accused persons and after carrying out fair and impartial investigation into the matter shall file charge sheet before the competent Court having criminal jurisdiction.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this case are that on 19.7.2020 respondent No.5 committed marpeet, misbehavior and slapped the petitioner when she tried to resist, the respondent No.5 started abusing due to private and personal grudge and threatened her to implicate in the false case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Police Authorities being hand-in-glove with the complainant refused to register the FIR lodged by the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner has made complaints dated 21.7.2020, 30.12.2020 and 24.6.2021 (Annexure P-2 to P-5) to the higher authorities for conducting fair and impartial investigation in the matter, but to no avail. Accordingly, it is prayed that respondents/Police Authorities may be directed to take cognizance of the matter on the complaints/representation (Annexure P-2 to P-5) filed by the petitioner and take action against the accused persons and after carrying out fair and impartial investigation into the matter shall file charge sheet before the competent Court having criminal jurisdiction.

4. Per contra learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State contends that the relief prayed in this petition cannot be granted to the petitioner in view of the fact that petitioner is having an alternative efficacious remedy of filing complaint before the Magistrate under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that it is well settled that disputed questions of fact cannot be looked into by this Court in Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As such, the present petition is liable to dismissed at the threshold.

5. Perused the record.

6. In the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State Of U.P. And Others ((2008)2 SCC 409) has 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 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 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) Cr.P.C. 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.

13. The same view was taken by this Court in Dilawar Singh v. State of Delhi JT 2007 (10) SC 585 (vide para 17). We would further clarify that even if an FIR has been registered and even if the police has made the investigation, or is actually making the investigation, which the aggrieved person feels is not proper, such a person can approach the Magistrate under section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and if the Magistrate is satisfied he can order a proper investigation and take other suitable steps and pass such order/orders as he thinks necessary for ensuring a proper investigation. All these powers a Magistrate enjoys under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

14. Section 156 (3) states:

“Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as abovementioned.” The words `as above mentioned obviously refer to section 156 (1), which contemplates investigation by the officer in charge of the Police Sta