JUDGMENT

1. The present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

'i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to initiate proceedings as per section 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. against the respondent no.4 and to register a crime and conduct fair and impartial investigation on the basis of the complaint against respondent no.4 as per annexure P/1 to P/3.

ii) Any other writ or writs, order or orders, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed together cost of the petition.'

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by inaction of the respondents No.2 and 3/Police Authority in not registering the FIR against respondent No.4. In this regard, petitioner has preferred representations on 0.10.2015 and 28.11.2015 (Annexures P/1, P/2 and P/3) for registering the FIR against respondent No.4; but, no action whatsoever has been taken thereupon. As such, the instant petition has been filed.

3. Per contra learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State contended 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.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. In the case of Sakiri Vasu vs 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 vs. 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 abovementioned obviously refer to Section 156 (1), which contemplates investigation by the officer in charge of the Police Station.

15. Section 156(3) provides for a check by the Magistrate on the police performing its duties under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. In cases where the Magistrate finds that the police has not done its duty of investigating the case at all, or has not done it satisfactorily, he can issue a direction to the police to do the investigation properly, and can mo