High Court Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shivnath Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2010

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivnath Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2010
                        W.P. No.14956/2008
4.5.2010

        Shri Arvind Chouksey, Advocate for the petitioner.

        Shri S.K. Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondents 1

to 4.

Heard on admission.

The petitioner, by this writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, is praying for fresh investigation in the

report lodged by his daughter i.e. respondent No.6 by an Officer

not below the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police.

2. The daughter of the petitioner has lodged a report in Police

Station, Lour, District, Rewa on which a case under Section 376

and 506, IPC has been registered against the petitioner vide

Crime No.153/2008. The prosecutrix has sent for medical

examination and prima facie case has been made out against the

petitioner.

3. The sole contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is

that a false case has been registered against the petitioner

whereas he has not been involved in the alleged offence. In

support of the said contention, he drew my attention to the report

lodged by respondent No.6.

4. If a person has a grievance that false case has been

registered against him and no proper investigation is held, it is

open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section

156(3), Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned. If

such an application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. is filed before

the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct a proper investigation to
be made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no

proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under

the same provision monitor the investigation to ensure a proper

investigation. Section 156(3) provides for a check by the

Magistrate on the Police performing its duty under Chapter XII,

Cr.P.C. In cases where the Magistrate finds that police has not

done its duty satisfactorily, he can issue a direction to the police

to do the investigation properly and can monitor the same.

5. Here in the present case, respondent No.6 in her reply

has very specifically stated that she has filed a complaint

against respondent No.5, however, under the influence of

respondent No.5, police has not taken any action against him

and she has not made any allegation against the present

petitioner.

6. Considering these facts and in case the investigation

is not completed and if no challan has been filed by the

Investigating Officer, respondent No.3 is directed to investigate

the matter under his supervision and complete the

investigation within a period of four months from the date of

receipt of certified copy of this order and to take appropriate

action in accordance with law.

7. With the aforesaid, Writ Petition No.14956/2008 is

disposed of.

(P.K. JAISWAL)
JUDGE