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

2025 Supreme(Online)(ORI) 130

ORISSA HIGH COURT
Gourishankar Satapathy, J
Swarnalata Jena – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha and others – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. R.D. Mohapatra
For the Respondents: Mr. S.K. Rout

Table of Content
1. grievance for non-registration of fir. (Para 1 , 2)
2. judicial avenues for addressing fir grievances. (Para 3 , 4)
3. criteria for magistrate's decision on investigations. (Para 5 , 6)
4. dismissal of petition underscoring proper judicial channels. (Para 7)

G. Satapathy, J.

2. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 CrPC 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 Sections 36 and 154(3) before the police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a

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