HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22369 of 2025 Court No. - 43 HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J. HON'BLE DIVESH CHANDRA SAMANT, J. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the A.G.A. representing the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs : - "1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 to add Ss. 303 and 329 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to the First Information Report dated 12/08/2025, registered as Case Crime No. 0581/2025, PS Kotwall, District Mainpuri. 2. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 to conclude the Investigation of Case Crime No. 0581/2025, PS Kotwali, District Mainpuri, after considering all allegations in a fair and impartial manner expeditiously." So far as relief no. (1) is concerned, the charges on which the accused be tried shall be decided by the Magistrate after the charge-sheet has been filed and on the basis of evidence filed in the charge-sheet. In view of the aforesaid, it is not a case to grant relief as sought in prayer no. (1), at this stage. So far as relief no. (2) is concerned, in Paragraph nos. 15 to 17 of its judgment in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2008) 2 SCC 409, the Supreme Court has observed as follows : - "15. Section 156(3) provides for a check by the Magistrate on the police performing its duties under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. In cases where the Magistrate finds that the police has not done its duty of investigating the case at all, or has not done it satisfactorily, he can issue a direction to the police to do the investigation properly, and can monitor the same. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shreyas Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Kamlesh Singh .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 10 Others .....Respondent(s) 16. The power in the Magistrate to order further investigation under Section 156(3) is an independent power, and does not affect the power of the investigating officer to further investigate the case even after submission of his report vide Section 173(8). Hence the Magistrate can order re-opening of the investigation even after the police submits the final report, vide State of Bihar vs. J.A.C. Saldanha (SCC : AIR para 19). 17. In our opinion Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is wide enough to include all such powers in a Magistrate which are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation, and it includes the power to order registration of an F.I.R. and of ordering a proper investigation if the Magistrate is satisfied that a proper investigation has not been done, or is not being done by the police. Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., though briefly worded, in our opinion, is very wide and it will include all such incidental powers as are necessary for ensuring a proper investigation." The provisions in B.N.S.S., 2023 which corresponds to Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. is Section 175(3) of B.N.S.S. In case, the petitioner has any grievance against the manner in which the investigation is being conducted, the petitioner has the remedy to approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 175(3) of B.N.S.S. / Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. It is not a case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, at this stage. The writ petition is dismissed. October 13, 2025 Vipasha CRLP No. 22369 of 2025 2 (Divesh Chandra Samant,J.) (Salil Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad