Ajit Kumar vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Heard learned counsels appearing for the parties.

The present writ application has been filed for a direction to the respondents to institute an F.I.R. and take action against the respondent no. 5.

It is submitted that petitioner took a flat for 11 months on basis of lease deed executed between him and the flat owner. After about fifteen days from

the date he took possession of the flat one, respondent no. 5 threatened him to vacate the flat otherwise to be ready to face dire consequences. On

08.08.2019, respondent no. 5 entered into his flat abused him and threatened to vacate the flat otherwise he will be murdered. Petitioner reported the

matter to S.H.O. Airport Police Station, Patna, but no action was taken. Thereafter petitioner submitted an application (Annexure-4) to the Sr. S.P.,

Patna complaining against the S.H.O. The respondent no. 5, on getting knowledge about the complain made by the petitioner, ousted him from his flat

and locked the same, but no protection was provided by the police. It is further submitted that the accused persons are still moving freely without any

fear and the petitioner is on road.

At the outset, this Court may advert to the scope of interference by this Court in matters of police investigation which falls within the exclusive domain

of the executive, as laid down in Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2008) 2 SCC 40.9 The guiding principles and procedure to be

followed in cases of failure by the police to registered an FIR or if proper investigation is not being conducted by the police after registering an FIR,

have been enunciated in lucid detail in the said judgment, relevant extracts wherefrom may be reproduced fruitfully as under :-

“The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. simply because a person

has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the

police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail,

under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a writ

petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.â€​

In the above circumstances and having regard to the above exposition of law, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter in exercise of its extra

ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as it has not been satisfactorily shown that the petitioner has taken appropriate

steps for redressal of his grievances.

The writ petition, accordingly, stands dismissed.