ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioners have sought for the following relief(s):-

(A) This Honourable Court may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition;

(B) This Honourable Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby directing respondent authorities to register the police complaint given by the petitioner on dated 11.01.2019 as First Information report under the Provisions of Indian Penal Code against the accused persons mentioned herein, in the interest of justice;

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Honourable Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Police Authorities to register the Police Complaint dated 11.01.2019 given by the petitioner as First Information Report in the interest of justice;

(D) ….......”

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by non-registration of the first information report on the basis of the complaint given in writing by them to the respondent- Police Sub Inspector, Vernama Police Station, District Vadodara.

3. It is their say that though cognizable offence is made out, their first information report is not being registered. Both the sides have been heard. This Court has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of “LALITA KUMARI V. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS”, reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1. It would be beneficial to regurgitate the relevant paragraph of the said decision, which reads as under :

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

(i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.

(ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a ment of the Apex Court in the case of “LALITA KUMARI V. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS”, reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1. It would be beneficial to regurgitate the relevant paragraph of the said decision, which reads as under :

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

(i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.

(ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.

(iii) If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.

(iv) The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.

(v) The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.

(vi) As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is to be conducted will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The category of cases in which preliminary inquiry may be made are as under:

(a) Matrimonial disputes/ family disputes;

(b) Commercial offences;

(c) Medical negligence cases;

(d) Corruption cases;

(e) Cases where there is abnormal delay/laches in initiating criminal prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay in reporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining the reasons for delay;

The aforesaid are only illustrations and not exhaustive of all conditions which may warrant preliminary inquiry.

(vii)