The Magistrate has the authority to monitor investigations under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., and petitioners must pursue alternate remedies before seeking relief under Section 482.

Heard finally.

1. Petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C . for quashment and setting aside the impugned order dated 14.1.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore in investigation proceedings of FIR No.181/2020 registered at P.S. Cyber Cell, Indore, whereby an application under Section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short " Cr.P.C .") filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a company engaged in the activities of manufacturing, sale and supply of the commercial vehicles and allied parts. The petitioner has discovered that as many as seven Duty Credit Scrips have been transferred from the petitioner-Company to another entity in a fraudulent and illegal manner, which have been illegally stolen and transferred from the applicant's account of Rs.1,65,76,974/-. Hence, the petitioner suffered huge monetary loss. Petitioner has made a complaint on 20.10.2020 at P.S. Cyber Cell, Indore, but the investigating agency is not doing proper investigation. Then he preferred an application under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C . before the learned JMFC, Indore for monitoring the investigation, but the same has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is against the law and facts. Trial court did not apply its mind and erred in holding that since the present matter is based upon the police report, then JMFC does not have power to entertain the aforesaid application. Hence, he prays that the impugned order be set aside and direct the JMFC, Indore to monitor the investigation to ensure fair and proper investigation.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the prayer and prays for its rejection.

5. Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C . provides as under:- "Any Magistrate empowered under Section 190 may order such an investigation as abovementioned."

6. Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C . is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation and it includes the power to order registration of an FIR and of ordering a proper investigation, if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Therefore, this Court is satisfied that the Magistrate has very wide powers to ensure a proper investigation and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly.

7. But the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 in Para-27 has held that:- "27.............The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C . simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Section 36 and 154(3) before the police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C . before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C . and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C ."

8. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu (supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner has grievance that his FIR is not being registered by the police and proper investigation is not being done, then the remedy available to the petitioner is only to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C . If the Magistrate refuses to exercise his power under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C ., then the alternate remedy is available for the petitioner to challenge the impugned order before the Revisional Court under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C ., but in the instant case petitioner did not avail the alternate remedy of filing