VIBHAKAR HASHMUKHRAI BRAHMBHATT Vs. NAVNEETBHAI SHAMALDAS BRAHMBHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by non -registration of the first information report on the basis of the complaint dated May 26, 2015 given in writing by the petitioner to the respondent No.12. It is his say that though cognizable offence is made out in the complaint, his complaint is not being registered as the first information report. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Lalita Kumari v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1.

(2.) Both the sides have been heard. This Court has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Lalita Kumari (supra).

(3.) Bearing in mind the aforementioned ratio laid down by the Apex Court, the respondent No.12 - Police Inspector shall look into the matter and lodge the first information report if any cognizable offence is made out; if not, for the limited purpose of knowing as to whether cognizable offence is revealed, the preliminary inquiry shall be conducted. The petitioner shall be forwarded a copy of the first information report, if any registered, at his residence forthwith. In the event, the respondent No.12 choses not to lodge the first information report, the petitioner shall be communicated in writing the brief reasons accordingly. Such exercise shall be completed by the respondent No.12 at the earliest, but not later than one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The entire exercise shall be done at the earliest without further loss of time. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Direct Service is permitted.