Item No. 30

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR

AT IMPHAL

WP(C) No. 700 of 2021

HT. Kilaching Anal

....Petitioner

-Versus-

State of Manipur & 3 Ors

....Respondents

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

(Video Conference)

16.03.2022

Heard Ms.Bisheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Also heard Mr.Niranjan, learned GA appearing on behalf of the

respondents.

The petitioner is the President of the Chandel LAMPS

Society, which is a registered Society under the Manipur Co-operative

Societies Act, 1976. By an order dated 3.8.1979, the Office of the

Deputy Commissioner (TPL), Chandel allotted a plot of land to the

petitioners’ Society measuring 221’ x 195’ sq.ft which was located on

the side of Ring Road and opposite to the VVF Camp, Chandel and

Staff Building of Education Department. Accordingly, the Society

constructed its Office building with the help of fund sanctioned by the

National Centre For Disease Control (NCDC).

In the year 2010 the Chiefs of Hnatham, Chandel Khullen,

Chandel Khubol and Chandel Christian villages interfered/trespassed

into the land of the Society without any authority by disturbing

administration of the Society. Again, in the year 2017, the

aforementioned Chiefs forcibly entered the Office Building of the

Society and locked the office and dismantled the fencing of the office,

which was accordingly reported to the Officer-in-charge, Chandel

Police Station on 23.1.2017 by the petitioner. However, no action was

taken by the respondents.

In the year 2018, the Chiefs of the aforementioned four

villages again illegally and forcibly entered inside the office building of

the Society and locked the office. Being aggrieved, the petitioner

approached the Deputy Commissioner, SDO Chandel, Superintendent

of Police and the Officer-in-Charge Chandel Police Station with the

representation dated 31.03.2018 seeking for intervention and stopping

the culprits from doing illegal acts on the land of the petitioner’s Society.

However, even after a lapse of 7 (seven) months, as no action was

taken, the petitioner approached the Superintendent of Police, Chandel

with a representation dated 18.11.2019 requesting to lodge an FIR

against the village Chiefs. As no action was taken, the petitioner also

made a representation dated 14.12.2020 before the Sub-Divisional

Officer, Chandel District for taking appropriate action against the

alleged culprits. As no action was taken, the petitioner has approached

this Court by the present writ petition with the prayer to issue a writ of

certiorari and/or mandamus directing the respondents to investigate

and take up necessary action in accordance with law and to evict the

encroachers from the land of the Society or to dispose the

representation of the petitioner for the ends of justice.

In the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs State of Uttar Pradesh &

Ors reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held

as under:

<26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been

registered by the police station his first remedy is to

approach the Superintendent of Police under Section

154(3) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in Section

36 Cr.P.C. If despite approaching the Superintendent of

Police or the officer referred to in Section 36 his grievance

still persists, then he can approach a Magistrate

under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the

High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover he has a further

remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section

200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ petitions or Section

482 petitions be entertained when there are so many

alternative remedies?

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