ORDER : Ramesh Sinha, J. 1. Heard Mr. K.P.S. Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondents. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writs, directing the respondents to perform their duties under the provisions of Section 202 of IPC and lodge FIR under Section 466, 468 and 471 of IPC against Swati Singh and connected culprit persons. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly further be pleased to grant any other relief or direction which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit, be also awarded to the petitioner.” 3. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to lodge FIR against one Swati Singh W/o. Dharmendra Verma, resident of Near Mangla Chowk, Mahaveer Nagar, dated 2/3.08.2019 (ANNEXURE P/1) made by petitioner before the respondent No. 1 and 2 as she herself has prepared forged document with the help of unknown culprit persons, as shown in the order dated 11.06.2019 of Revenue Case No.1190/B- 121/2018-19 passed by Executive Magistrate, Bilaspur (C.G) in fact this case number relates to one Dolly Kashyap/Sunil Kashyap in the Revenue Case register of Executive Magistrate, Bilaspur. 4. Mr. Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the instant matter, one lady namely Swati Singh, made a written complaint against the petitioner that she was used to meet with petitioner and later on their friendship was developed into the physical relations between them and a result of such relation, one female child was born and she got registered the birth certificate dated 14.06.2019. After making complaint by her against the petitioner, in this birth certificate, she mentioned her female child as Anushka Bajaj, daughter of petitioner Bharat Bajaj on the basis of false and fabricated order dated 11.06.2019 showing it to be issued by the respondent No.3 Executive Magistrate, Bilapur in Revenue case No.1190/B-121/2018- 19. In fact, this case is registered in the name of Dolly Kashyap/Sunil Kashyap. Hence, she has prepared false and fabricated document as order dated 11.06.2019 passed by Executive Magistrate, Bilapur. In fact, this case is registered in the name of Dolly Kashyap/Sunil Kashyap. Hence, she has prepared false and fabricated document as order dated 11.06.2019 passed by Executive Magistrate, Bilapur. Prior to the birth certificate dated 11.06.2019, she had got registered first birth certificate of her same female child mentioning her name as "Anushka Verma" on the date of 19.11.2012. Looking to the aforesaid facts, it is very crystal clear that the said Swati Singh has committed offences under Sections 466, 468 and 471 of IPC alongwith other culprit persons whose may be from the office of the Executive Magistrate, Bilaspur and said forged document is prepared by Swati Singh to use it as genuine document against the petitioner in the offence under Section 376 of IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioner, after obtaining the aforementioned documents made a complaint to the respondent No.1 and 2 to lodge the FIR against Swati Singh, but no action was taken by them though it was the duty of the respondents that if any offence is committed by preparing the false and fabricated document of Executive Magistrate, the FIR must be lodged against them. Hence, this petition. 5. The matter came up for hearing on 15.10.2019 and the learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, in order to have an authoritative pronouncement of this Court and looking to the fact that it involves a substantial question of law, referred the matter to the Hon’ble Chief Justice for constituting a Larger Bench under Rule 32(2)(i) of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007, on the question which reads as under: “Whether in view of remedies available to the writ petitioner under Sections 154(3), 156(3), 190 and 200 of the CrPC, writ of mandamus/appropriate direction can be issued to the police authorities to perform statutory duty under Section 154(1) of the CrPC in this petition stating that despite giving information of the commission of cognizable offences, first information report is not being registered?” 6. Hon’ble the then Chief Justice was pleased to direct listing of the matter before a Division Bench of this Court, and the matter was listed on 25.11.2019. Thereafter, the matter came to be listed on various dates till 29.01.2021. 7. We have gone through the question referred by the learned Single Judge, as stated above. Hon’ble the then Chief Justice was pleased to direct listing of the matter before a Division Bench of this Court, and the matter was listed on 25.11.2019. Thereafter, the matter came to be listed on various dates till 29.01.2021. 7. We have gone through the question referred by the learned Single Judge, as stated above. This Court, in the matter of Smt. Mohanmati Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, passed in WPCr No. 181 of 2023, on 06.04.2023, had an occasion to decide a case in which the petitioner had prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to make proper investigation and to register the crime against the accused person for the alleged act of cheating and and further to file charge-sheet before the concerned Court which was denied by the respondent authorities. 8. In Smt. Mohanmati Gupta (supra), this Court, relying on a decision of the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020: Waseem Haider v. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home & Others, vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020, dismissed the said petition reserving liberty to the petitioner therein to avail appropriate remedy before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, no further deliberation or fresh deliberation is required on the reference made in this petition. The reference made by the learned Single Judge is no longer res integra and this reference stands answered accordingly. 9. The matter be listed before the Bench having the roster.