( 2026:JHHC:13557 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No. 234 of 2026 ------- Vinay Lodha, aged about 39 years, son of Shankar Lal Lodha, resident of 1247 Ground Floor, Matkamhatu Chaibasa, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. …... …. Petitioner (s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 4. The Officer-in-Charge, Chaibasa Mufassil Police Station, Chaibasa, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5. The Investigation Officer, Chaibasa Mufassil Police Station, Chaibasa Mufassil, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 6. Amit Das 7. Sheela Shubhdar Shani 8. Prabhandhak Swarup Patnayak .…. …. Respondents -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY -------- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, S.C.-IV Order No. 02/ Dated 06.05.2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned S.C.-IV. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondent No.5 to properly investigate Chaibasa Mufassil P.S. Case No.30 of 2024. In the context of the prayer made in this writ application, reference is made to the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409, wherein, it has been held as follows: “26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police station his first remedy is to approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC or other police officer referred to in Section 36 CrPC. If despite approaching the Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to in Section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC. Moreover, he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC. Why then should writ petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are so many alternative remedies? 27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 CrPC 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 police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC.” In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner, this writ application stands disposed of. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Dated 06/05/2026 BS/-