District Alwar, (Rajasthan) v. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary

Judgment

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Additional Director General Of Police, (Anti Human Trafficking Unit), Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

4. The Superintendent Of Police, District Alwar (Rajasthan). The District Collector, Collectorate, District Alwar (Rajasthan).

5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Harsora, District Alwar (Rajasthan).

6. Sandeep Gurjar S/o Sh. Mamchand, Aged About 22 Years, Mugalpur, Police Station- Harsora, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar,(Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Mr. Satish Kumar with Ms. Renu Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Aman Kumar Ms. Shipra Rajawat RPS CO Virat Nagar, Distt. Kotputli Behror HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 19/09/2025

1. This petition in the nature of Habeas Corpus filed by the petitioner with a prayer that minor daughter of the petitioner (hereinafter as referred to ‘detenue’) be produced in the Court. FIR No.74/2022 under Section 363 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (VA) [2025:RJ-JP:38515-DB] (2 of 4) [HC-164/2022] of SC/ST Act, 1989 was registered by the petitioner at Police Station Harsora, District Alwar. It is alleged that the minor daughter has been abducted.

2. Raising grievance that effective steps are not taken by the police authorities, the present petition was filed. Since 2022 several reports have been filed detailing out the steps taken and measures being adopted for the investigation in the FIR.

3. On 07.08.2025, the Superintendent of Police, District Kotputli,Behror was directed to personally monitor the matter and following order was passed:- “Today the concerned Police Officer has produced the status report dated 06.08.2025 before this Court. We are not satisfied with the efforts made by the Police officials to trace the corpus. It is unfortunate that the corpus is a minor girl aged about 15 years and is missing since 29.03.2022. We have perused the record. The Director General of Police, Rajasthan has also appeared before this Court on 07.04.2025 and assured the Court for making serious efforts in this matter. However, despite naming the accused by the complainant in the FIR, neither the accused nor the corpus has been traced out by the Police officials. In that view of the matter, we direct the Superintendent of Police, District Kotputli-Behror to personally monitor the matter and hold his/her office daily for one hour as per his/her own convenience at Police Station Harsora, District Alwar (Raj.) so that sincere efforts can be made by his/her subordinate Police Officers and the corpus can be traced out in his/her supervision. List this matter on 21.08.2025. Learned Government Advocate-cum-Additional Advocate General may inform the Superintendent of Police, District Kotputli-Behror about passing of this order today itself. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police, District Kotputli-Behror by fax today itself for necessary compliance."

4. Status report dated 18.09.2025 filed by learned GA-cum-AAG today is taken on record.

5. As per the status report, the team has been formulated to nab the accused in FIR No.74/2022. Further that the search was [2025:RJ-JP:38515-DB] (3 of 4) [HC-164/2022] made in the State of Haryana at Bawal and Rewari. The posters of the accused are being pasted and an award of Rs.25,000/- has been announced for giving information of the accused. Further on failure to execute the arrest warrant, the proceedings for absconding u/s 37 of the Police Act,1861 have been initiated and the next date fixed is 15.10.2025.

6. The Supreme Court in case of Sakiri Vasu vs. Stat of Uttar Pradesh and ors. reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 held: “11. In this connection we would like to state that if a person has a grievance that the police station is not registering his FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C., then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. by an application in writing. Even if that does not yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is still not registered, or that even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Section 156 (3) is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered and also can direct a proper investigation to be made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under the same provision monitor the investigation to ensure a proper investigation.

12. Thus in Mohd. Yousuf vs. Smt. Afaq Jahan this Court observed: “11.The clear position therefore is that any judicial Magistrate, before taking cognizance of the offence, can order investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code. If he does so, he is not to examine the complainant on oath because he was not taking cognizance of any offence therein. For the purpose of enabling the police to start investigation it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR. There is nothing illegal in doing so. After all registration of an FIR involves only the process of entering the substance of the information relating to the commission of the cognizable offence in a book kept by the officer in charge of the police station as indicated in Section 154 of the Code. Even if a Magistrate does not say in [2025:RJ-JP:38515-DB] (4 of 4) [HC-164/2022] so many words while directing investigating under Section 156(3) of the Code that an FIR should be registered, it is the duty of the officer in charge of the police station to register the FIR regarding the cognizable offence disclosed by the complaint because that police officer contemplated in Chapter XII of the Code only thereafter.” further

13. The same view was taken by this Court in Dilawar Singh vs. State of Delhi. We would further clarify that even if an FIR has been registered and even if the police has made the investigation, or is actually making the investigation, which the aggrieved person feels is not proper, such a person can approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and if the Magistrate is satisfied he can order a proper investigation and take other suitable steps and pass such order order(s) as he thinks necessary for ensuring a proper investigation. All these powers a Magistrate enjoys under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.”

7. Considering that efforts are being made by the police but the desired result has not been yielded. The petition is disposed of with direction to the Superintendent of Police to personally monitor the investigation of the case on fort nightly basis and the team investigating the matter shall give the written report to the Superintendent of Police every month.

8. The petitioner if dissatisfied would be at liberty to approach the Magistrate for supervising of the investigation.

9. In the eventuality of the application being made, the Court concerned shall consider the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible in the facts of the case. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/81