AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prasanna B. Varale, CJ
This intra-court appeal seeks to lay a challenge to a learned Single Judge's order dated 18.06.2021 whereby the appellant’s W.P.No.7370/2021 has been disposed off without granting any substantive relief to him. However, liberty is reserved to the appellant ‘to seek remedy before appropriate forum’.
Learned counsel for the appellant argues that his client had filed the subject writ petition with a prayer for the issuance of writ of mandamus to the ‘respondent-Police to take cognizance of the complaint dated 28.11.2017, registered crime, prepare FIR, conduct enquiry and proceed against the accused’ who happens to be the sixth respondent herein; that being the position the police ought to have been directed to register the crime and to undertake investigation. That having not been done, there is error apparent on the face of the impugned order and therefore, the same is liable to be voided.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents, we decline indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the reasoning on which the impugned order has been structured. It hardly needs to be stated that a criminal law can be set in motion by any person as a general rule; if the court fails to register FIR even in respect of a cognizable offence, law is now settled that the aggrieved can file a private compliant before the competent forum vide Sheonandan Paswan vs. State of Bihar, (1987) 1 SCC 288 which view has been reiterated in LALITA KUMARI VS. GOVT. OF U.P., (2014) 2 SCC 1. That is the reason why liberty has been reserved to the appellant. We do not find justification for interference.
In the above circumstances, this appeal being devoid of merits is liable to be and accordingly dismissed, costs having been made easy.