Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Facts

The petitioner's son, an army officer, died at a railway station; the petitioner alleged it was a murder, not a suicide as the police concluded, and that the investigation was inadequate. Dissatisfied with the police, he approached the High Court directly. The Supreme Court considered the appropriate remedy for an aggrieved informant who is dissatisfied with a police investigation.

Issues

• What remedy is available to a person aggrieved by police inaction or an inadequate investigation.
• Whether the Magistrate under S156(3) has the power to direct registration of an FIR and to monitor or order proper/further investigation.

Arguments

The petitioner contended that the investigation was perfunctory and that the High Court should order a CBI/independent investigation. The Court's view was that the ordinary and efficacious remedy lies before the Magistrate under S156(3), whose powers are wide enough to secure a proper investigation, rather than rushing to the High Court under Article 226 or S482.

Held

The Court held that S156(3) is very wide and includes all incidental and implied powers necessary to ensure a proper investigation, including the power to order registration of an FIR, to direct a proper investigation, and to monitor the investigation though not to conduct it himself. If a person has a grievance that an FIR is not registered, his first remedy is to approach the SP under S154(3) and, failing that, to apply to the Magistrate under S156(3), who can direct registration and proper investigation. People should ordinarily exhaust this remedy instead of filing writ petitions or S482 applications.

Ratio decidendi

A Magistrate exercising power under S156(3) has wide incidental and implied powers to ensure registration of an FIR and a proper and, where necessary, further investigation; this is the ordinary remedy for an aggrieved informant before resorting to the High Court.

Significance

A leading and frequently cited authority that channels grievances about non-registration and faulty investigation to the Magistrate under S156(3), reducing the flood of writ petitions. The principle continues under S175(3) BNSS, which now expressly strengthens the Magistrate's supervisory role.

Related