SHADAMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State-respondent.

(2.) THE section 482, Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.9.2008, passed by Judicial Magistrate, District Gautam Budh Nagar, in Case No. 221/2008 Shadama v. Noor Mohammad by means of which the petitioner's application under section 156(3), Cr.P.C. has been di­rected to be registered as a complaint case.

(3.) LEARNED A.G.A. has submitted that the order impugned, in the present application, has been passed after consider­ing entire facts and evidence on record which suffers from no illegality or infirmity in law and calls no interference by this Court under section 482, Cr.P.C. He has further submitted that a perusal of the in­jury report, Annexure-3 to the application, does not disclose commission of cognizable offence and all injuries are shown to be caused by hard and blunt object. Learned A.G.A. has relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, 2008 (60) ACC 689 (SC) = 2008 (2) AIC 236 = 2008 (2) SCC 409 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that caution should be exercised by the High Court in the matter which relates to non-registration of first information report or improper investigation. It was held that High Court should discourage writ peti­tions or petitions under section 482, Cr.P.C. where alternative remedies under section 154(3) read with section 36 or section 156(3) or section 200, Cr.P.C. have not been ex­hausted. Learned A.G.A. has also referred a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Sukhwasi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2007 (59) ACC 739 = 2007 (60) AIC 503 (SC) wherein this Court has held that the Magistrate is not bound to order regis­tration of a first information report in all cases where a cognizable offence has been disclosed and the Magistrate has authority to treat it as complaint.