AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for issuing directions to respondents No.2 and 3 to register an FIR in cognizable offence against the culprits on the basis of complaint dated 10.02.2024 (Annexure P-1) and thereafter, investigation be handed over to any senior officer or independent investigation agency to conduct fair investigation and to decide the said complaint and representation dated 06.07.2026 (Annexure P-2).
Upon notice, Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G. Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Hon’ble Supreme Court while relying upon (2008) 2 SCC 409, Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. in SLP (Crl.) No.1088 of 2026, Sujal Vishwas Attavar and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others, decided vide judgment dated 04.05.2026, has held as under:-
“7.Keeping in view the above exposition of law, we find that the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to have been invoked when alternative equally efficacious statutory remedies were available. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or having been registered, proper investigation is not being conducted, then the remedy does not ordinarily lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but in seeking recourse to the statutory framework, unless of course the urgency of the circumstances warrant otherwise.
8.The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) provides a structured sequential mechanism for initiating criminal prosecution. The statutory framework contemplates that information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is first placed before the officer-in-charge of the police station and an FIR is registered under Section 173(1) BNSS. In the event of refusal to register the FIR, recourse lies before the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS and, thereafter, before the Magistrate, under Section 175(3) BNSS.”
The prayer of the petitioner is to take action against the private respondents and to register the FIR against them. However, the petitioner has the remedy to approach the Area Magistrate for redressal of his grievance by moving an appropriate application under BNSS, 2023 and the learned Magistrate shall proceed further. However, the facts of the case do not warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. As such, no further action is called for in the present petition.
In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.