Madhya Pradesh High Court
Naveen Bajaj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 3 November, 2016
1
WA.358/2016
Naveen Bajaj Vs. State of M.P. & ors.
03 .11.2016
Shri Raghvendra Dixit counsel for the appellant.
Shri Praveen Newaskar, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondents / State.
This case was heard and reserved for passing final orders. It is seen from the record that appellant has placed reliance upon a decision rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WA No. 190/2016 ( Naveen Kushwaha Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) decided on 13.07.2016 where the order of writ court was differed with by a Coordinate bench and directions were issued to Police to discharge its statutory duty under Section 154 Cr.P.C.in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the Constitution Bench decision in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1.
While going through the record and the applicable law, this Court could lay its hand on the decision of Apex Court in the case of Aleque Padamsee and Ors. Vs. Union of India reported in (2007) 6 SCC 171 rendered by three Judges Bench holding that it is obligatory on the part of Police to register the FIR when information is provided regarding commission of cognizable offence, but if the same is not done by the police then the option available to the aggrieved person / informant / victim is under Section 190 read with Section 200 of Cr.P.C.
The decision of Aleque Padamsee (supra) is though referred in the five Judges Bench decision in Lalita Kumari 2 WA.358/2016 (supra) but the ratio laid down in Aleque Padamsee has not been disturbed or distinguished. It is thus necessary to find out as to whether the said decision of Aleque Padamsee (supra) has any bearing on the issue involved in the present case.
Accordingly, for the above said purpose, the matter be listed in the next week for rehearing on admission.
(Sheel Nagu) (S.K. Awasthi)
Judge Judge
sarathe