Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 481 (RAJ)

Nawal Kishore Dangyach v. State of Rajasthan

2023-02-10

BIRENDRA KUMAR

body2023
ORDER S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 188/2023:- 1. The petitioner has sought for following reliefs in this petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India. 'It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly allow this writ petition and by issuing appropriate order and direction and be pleased to: a) accept and allow this petition and kindly direct the respondent No. 2 to conduct a fair and impartial investigation by getting matter investigated from SOG; b) direct the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to not to submit the negative Final Report in the present matter; c) order departmental enquiry against erring Police officials who have connived to help the accused in the matter; d) Any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed or given in favour of the petitioners to protect his right and interest.' 2. The FIR discloses cheating in course of purchase of land and also discloses case of making forged pattas, the dispute is private in nature. The report at Annexure 3 reveals that the SP/SOG is taking care of the fair investigation of the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that fair investigation is not possible by the present Agency as initially charge-sheet was proposed in the case, however, by the direction of the Superior Authority investigator was changed and now FR is proposed. 4. For the redressal of the aforesaid grievance, the petitioner would have remedy under the law by filing protest petition etc. on material collected during investigation. The Police is independent to come to any particular conclusion based on the material on record and the party would be at liberty to challenge the same. 5. The Magistrate has ample power to monitor fair and impartial investigation of the case. 6. In Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in AIR 2008 SC 907 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court stated in para 27 as follows:- '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). 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 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 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 by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C.' 7. The aforesaid view was reiterated in Sudhir Bhaskarrao Rao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and Ors. reported in 2016 (6) SCC 277 . 8. Again in M. Subramaniam and Anr. Vs. S. Janaki and Anr. reported in 2020 (16) SCC 728 , a three Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated the view taken in Sakiri Vasu (supra). 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does not create a complete embargo on the power of the Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to monitor the investigation in appropriate cases. 10. The Court does not find any extra ordinary case or situation wherein monitoring is required by this Court, specially when the Magistrate has not been approached for monitoring nor there is any material that the Magistrate is not properly monitoring the investigation. Other reliefs are refused in the facts and circumstances of the case. 11. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned for fair investigation. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2444/2019:- 12. Let respondent No.2 file reply within two weeks. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the FIR No.700/2017 registered with Police Station Vaishali Nagar Jaipur (West), the petitioners had approached the Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. however, it was informed by the State-respondent that the Police is going to propose negative report in this matter. 14. In the circumstance petitioners had withdrawn the prayer. 15. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the FIR No.700/2017 registered with Police Station Vaishali Nagar Jaipur (West), the petitioners had approached the Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. however, it was informed by the State-respondent that the Police is going to propose negative report in this matter. 14. In the circumstance petitioners had withdrawn the prayer. 15. Considering the aforesaid submissions, it is directed that the petitioner No.1 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid FIR, till further order with condition that the petitioner No.1 shall fully cooperate with the investigating of the case. Petitioner No.2 was already arrested. 16. List on 26.04.2023.