Md. Khaleel v. '1. The State of Telangana

Petition t nder Article 226 of the Constitution of lnclia praying that in the circumstances r;tated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issuer a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus' declaring the action of the respondent police in not registering the Crime against the unofficial respondent Nos. 6 to 13 under:;ection 301,326,441, 427 and 506 R/w.34 of lPC, inspite of the petitioners writen complaint dt.24.11-2019 is illegar and void and opposed to Articre,s 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lrrdia and consequently to direct the respondent police to register the crime against respondent No.6 to 13 for the offences uncler sections 302,326, 447' 427 and 1506 R/w.34 of lPCand atso take necessary action against respondent No.6 to 13 and give protection to the petitioner life and 1iberty including the proprerty of the petitioner from hands of the resprondent No.6 to 13. lA NO: 1 oF 202A Petition unrjer Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the responclent Police to register the case against the respondent nos.6 to 13 for the offence:; punishabte under sections 307, 326, 447, 427 & 506 R/w.34 of IPC on the basis of the written complaint dt.24.11.2019, perrding disposal of the above Writ Petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2020 Petition underSection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to file additional documents and receive the same in connection with the acknowledgments (online track recorcl) of the petitioner complaint dt.24.11.2019 to the respondent No.2, 3 & 5. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt AKKAM ESHWAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1toS : Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Re,spondents No.6to13 : The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI ORDER: 'I'his writ Petition is filed r,vith the follorving relief: ,....to issuc a vrit order or direcrion more particularh, one in the nature of \[andarnus cleclaring tl.re action 0[ the respondent police in no-t reglstering the Crirne against the unolficial rcsponclcnt Nos 6 to 13 under section 307 326 447 421 ani 5()(r R/rv 3-t ot IlrC iuspite of the petitioners written complaint dt l-+.11.2019 is illcgal and void aticl opposed to '\rticles 14 l9 and 21 oI (.onstitution of It'rdia arld consccluen(lv to &ect the rcspondent Police to register tlrc crittre auaitrst respo*clcnt N,i 6 t., 13 for the oft'ences utrder section 30] 326 +11 +27 ancl 506 n/ri' :+ of [P(.anci alsc> take neccssary actiotr against respondent N<, (r ro 13 and give prorecrion ro the petitioncr life and liberty including thc pr()l)ert\, <,i tlrc petitioner liom thc hands of the respondent No 6 to 13 and to l)as s.

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner'

3. Fleard learned Assistant Government Pleader fot Home appearing for rcspondent Nos. 1 to 5.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has submitted that the relief sought in the present writ petition, namely, a direction to the police authorities to registef a cfimiflal case, is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the well-settled legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 2

5. I have considered tl-re submissions advanccd and pen-ised the materials plar:ed on record

6. 'Ihe cc,re grievancc oF the petitioncr is thar. despite having submitted a wrirten complaint dated Z4.lI.ZO19. rhe concerned police authorities failed ro register a crirninal casc. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has inr.oked thc rvrit jurisdiction of this Court under Arucle 226 of the Consriudon of India, seeking a writ of manclamus to cc>rnpcl the policc authoritir:s ro registcr an F'IR.

7. The legal position in matters of this naturrc 1:j no longer res integra. rn Sakii f 'asu u. .f tate oJ'L.:.P. dz ot/ters (Allt 200g sC 907), the Hon'ble Supreme Cor-rrr categorically helcl rhat where rhe grievance relzrtes to the refus al of the police to ;:egister a First Information Report FIR), a writ petition under ^\rticle 226 is ordinarily nor maintainable. The court emphasizecl rhat the code of Criminal J?rocedure, 1973 ("Cr.p.C.") provicles, adequate, ^rL efficacious, and self-contained statutory framework ro address such . sltuatlons. 3

8. This principle has been consistently reiterated in latet decisions. lvlost notabiy, rn M. Su.brantaniam u. S. Janaki dv Others (AIR 2020 SC 387), a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court reaffirn-red tl-rat the appropriate remedv for an aggrieved parry lies rvithin the procedural avenues provicied under the Cr.P.C., in I I particular, by approaching the i\fagistrate under Section 156(3) for a direction to investigate, or under Section 200 for a complaint case, rather than bt, invoking the exffaordinary writ iurisdiction of the High Court g. In light o[ these settled principles, and in the absence of any exceptional or extraorc{in ry circr-rmstances that would iustifu the exercise of writ iurisdiction, the reliefl sought by the petitioner cannot be entertained under Article 226. The statutory scheme under the Cr.P.C. offers sufficient and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, and the petitioner remains at liberfy to pursue those remedies in accordance with law, should his grievance pefslst. 4

10. Accordingh,, rvith the above direction, the u,rit petition is dismissed as not maintainablc. There shall be no order as ro costs Miscella.neous Petitions, pending it anv, shall sra.nd closcd. //TRUE COPY// To, SD/.B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6\ SECTION OFFICER Hyderabad. 1- The Principal secretary, Home Department, secretariat, Telangana state, 2- The superintendent of police, Vikarabad, Vikarabad District. 3. The Deputy superintendent of police, Vikarabad, vikarabad District. 4. of the potice, Dharur police Station, nharur, Vikarabad, ilf*ffi,f l!l:f'.,-"j,"r District.

5. The SHo Dharur, Dharur police station, Dharur, vikarabad, vikarabad 6. One CC to tiRtAKKAM ESHWAR, Advocate. tOpUCl 7 ' Two ccs to GP FoR HOME, High court for the state of --erangana. 8. Two CD Copies [oUT] BSK BS {7 \ t HIGH COURT DATED i12l0trl2025 ORDER WP.No.1558 of 2A20 o o t ll t{[\J ?025 * t) L.t;irnTC I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GOSTS \