JUDGMENT Vipin Sinha, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present revision has been filed for quashing the order dated 20.03.2015 passed by learned A.D.J., Court No. 8, Kanpur Dehat in Misc. Case No. 7/12/15 by means which the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration of criminal case/FIR has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has contended that a bare perusal of the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C., would demonstrate the commission of cognizable offence, thus, the order impugned is bad in the eye of law. 4. A Full Bench of this Court in the case of Father Thomas Vs. State and another reported in (2011) 1 ADJ 333 , in para 62 has observed that: "The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petitions or petitions under section 482 Cr.P.C. simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police officers, 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 be filing a writ petition or a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C." With the aforesaid observation, the revision is disposed off finally.