CASE TITLE:
Kameshbhai Niranjanbhai Sopariwala vs State of Gujarat
DATE OF ORDER:
5th April, 2022
JUDGE(S):
Hon’ble Justice A.S. Supehia
PARTIES:
Petitioner:- Kameshbhai Niranjanbhai Sopariwala
Respondent:- State of Gujarat
SUBJECT
The Gujarat High Court ruled that the petitioners who directly approached the High Court without first approaching the concerned magistrate under section 156(3),were in direct conflict with the guidelines of the Apex court.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
- Section 156(3) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- Section 154(3) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
BRIEF FACTS
- The petitioner had been running the business of manufacturing and selling of art silk and gray garments since last 10 years and was invited to sell the material to the accused persons.
- The accused persons assured the petitioner of huge profit and regular payments.Relying on the assurance of the accused the petitioner sold the material of worth Rs 35,87,300 to the accused.
- After waiting 60 days for the payment the petitioner requested the accused to make the payment. Finally, 8 cheques were issued from the side of accused but the same were dishonoured and the payment was not made.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER
- The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was obligatory on the part of the authorities to register the complaint against the accused persons and the reliance was placed on the cases of Lalita Kumari Vs. state of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 S.C.C. 1 and State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani, (2017) 2 S.C.C. 779.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
- The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has no locus standi to approach this hon’ble court and the hon’ble high court also can’t direct the police to register an FIR with an aim to investigate as held in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
ANALYSIS OF THE COURT
- ll; The hon’ble high court held that if the police station is not registering an FIR the person can approach the SP under section 154(3) and even if it doesn’t result in satisfactory result he can file an application under section 156(3) before the concerned magistrate.
- ll; Section 156(3) is wide enough to ensure a proper investigation according to the court.
- ll; The hon’ble high court held that if it entertains such writ petitions than the court will be flooded with such writ petitions and will not be able to do the regular work.
CONCLUSION
The learned court was correct in law in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner should have approach the magistrate in the first place before coming to this court and hence rightly rejected the petition.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
