Sakiri Vasu vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2008)
⚖️ Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2008)
Citation: (2008) 2 SCC 409
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Markandey Katju and Justice H.K. Sema
📝 Background / Facts:
Sakiri Vasu approached the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, seeking a direction to the police to register an FIR regarding an alleged offense.
His complaint was not being registered by the police, and he claimed his grievance could only be resolved by the High Court under Article 226 (writ jurisdiction).
This case raised a legal question: Should a person approach the High Court directly when the police refuse to register an FIR, or is there an alternative remedy?
❓ Key Legal Issue:
Whether the Magistrate has the power under Section 156(3) CrPC to order the police to register an FIR and investigate a cognizable offense?
Should the High Court be approached directly for this purpose under Article 226?
⚖️ Judgment:
The Supreme Court held:
✅ Yes, the Magistrate has power under Section 156(3) CrPC
If the police refuse to register an FIR, the aggrieved person can approach the Magistrate, who can direct the police to investigate.
This is a statutory remedy available to a citizen.
❌ No need to directly approach the High Court
The High Court should not be flooded with such matters.
Article 226 should be used sparingly, especially when there is an alternative statutory remedy.
📌 Key Principles Laid Down:
Magistrate’s Power (Section 156(3) CrPC):
Magistrates have judicial authority to direct registration of FIRs and investigation.
It is a powerful remedy and must be utilized before approaching higher courts.
Limited Use of Writ Jurisdiction:
High Courts should not entertain petitions under Article 226 for FIR registration if Section 156(3) remedy exists.
Only in exceptional cases should writ jurisdiction be invoked.
Efficient Use of Judicial Resources:
Encourages judicial discipline and reliance on the hierarchy of courts.
Prevents overburdening constitutional courts with matters that can be handled by lower courts.
🔍 Importance of the Case:
It is a landmark judgment clarifying the role of the Magistrate in the criminal justice system.
Reinforces the principle of alternative remedy before invoking writ jurisdiction.
Frequently cited in matters where police inaction is alleged.
🧾 Relevant Provisions:
| Provision | Description |
|---|---|
| Section 154 CrPC | Police obligation to register FIR in cognizable cases |
| Section 156(3) CrPC | Magistrate's power to order investigation |
| Article 226, Constitution | High Court’s power to issue writs |
Do write to us if you need any further assistance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments