High Court · 2025

Petition uniJer Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents for non registering of FIR on complaint given by the petitioner on 18-12-2024 is illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and direct them to Register FIR and conduct enquiry. lA NO: I OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'l 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 respondents No.4 to 6 to supply the water for regular use and for drinking and to provide other common amenities to the petitioner frat bearing Frat No.104, i st floor, situated at Sai Anusha, Laxmi Residency, Mythri Nigar, Kukatpa'y' Hyderabad, pending disposar of the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI y.V.S.S.SIVA SARMA Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 3: Gp FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No. 1O431 of 2025 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioncr in the present Writ petition is .that the respondents_authorities, basing on the complaint made by the petitioner on 18.12.2024, are not initiating action by registering the FIR against the unofficial respondents, which action of the respondents it is contended as highly i egal and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government pleader for Home appearing for the official respondent Nos.1 to 3, and with the consenL of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Having regard to the nature of lis involved in the Writ Petition and the marner of disposal, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficiar respondent Nos.4 to 6 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ petition

4. Learned counsel appearir-rg on bchalf oI petitioner and learned Government - pleader for llome appcaring for the officiai respondents submit that the issue involved in the Writ petition is squarely covered by a de.cision of this Court in Wp.No.715 9 of 2025 2 ( & batch, dt. 10.03.2025, and the said common order rvould apply in all force to the facts of the present case.

5. Recording the same, for reasons alike zis were stated in the aforesaid Writ Petition s, uid.e W.P.Nos.7159 of 2025 & batch, dt. 10.03.2025, and in terms thereof, the present Writ Petition is also disposed of. No order as to cosls.

6. Registry is directed to append a copy of the order passed in W.P.Nos.7159 of 2025 & batch, dt. 10.03.2025, to this order.

7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shalt stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.T. JAYASREE DEPUry REGISTRAR - =r- --- *. - 'r---.-t-i>-. SECTION OFFICER To, .1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, secretariat, Hyderabad, state of Telangana.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kukatpally, Hyderabad' 3. The Station House Officer, P.S. Kukatpally' Kukatpally, Hyderabad' 4. one CC to SRiY.V.S.S.SIVA SARMA, Advocate [OPUC] 5.TwoCCstoGPFORHOME,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD Cgpies (Along with the copy of order dated 10.03.2025, in W'P'No'7159 of 2025 & ls fr BSR ) I \ A$ B ENr'-,-g) HIGH COURT DATED:0810412025 I I ,l L.Y .v- s?_ F s \=' CA \ C 3 Hc\ ,4 t ORDER WP.No.10431 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS qcrP@ Sr" THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.Nos. 7159 7176 720. 7214 antl 7329 of 2025 COMMON ORDER: Since the grievance of the petitioners in all the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners a_nd the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the officia_l respondents and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, these writ petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Having regard to the nature of lis involved and the manner of disposal, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondents in all these writ petitions is not necessar5r for adjudication of the present Writ Petitions.

4. Shorn of unnecessar1r details, the case of the petitioners in brief is that the respondents-authorities are not following the provisions of Section 154(3) of the Cr.P.C., and Section 774 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Salhita (for short tsNSSJ by initiating action to register FIRs against the unofficial respondents, respectively, basing on the complaints made by the petitioners, which action of the respondents it is contended as highly illegal arrd arbitrary. 2

5. Per contra,learned Government pleader for Home appearing for olhcial respondents would submit that for non _ registration of FIR, the petitioners cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the constitution of India r.r-*,i.* of the decision of. this Court in the case of Goaind Raju Sarrri Vs The Stqte of Telangana and. othersli that in the event of the respondent SHO refusing to register FIR, the petitioners have altemate remedies provided under tlre Code of Criminal procedure, l9Z3 or BNSS to seek redressal of their grievalce; and that invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without exhausting ttre alternate remedies is contrar5r to the dicta laid down by the Hon,ble in the case of Sakirt Vas,u Vs State oJ Uttar Supreme Court Prad.eshz. 6 I have taken note of the respective contentions urged ald perused the record_

7. In simi.lar circumstances, this Corrrt in W.p.No.24495 of 2019, dt.27.O4.2O2O, W.P.No.8189 and, t269t of 2O2O, dt.3t.Ot.2O24, and. also in W.ir.ruo]Z446 of 2022 and W.p.No.38397 of 2019, having regard to the law laid down by a three_judge bench of the Supreme Court in M, Subramarrlam and. Ors. Vs. S. Janaki and. Ors3, wherein the dicta laid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in the case I zotg 1+1 eto nl ' 2ooE (2) scc 409 '(2020) t6 scc 728 .,:., 3 of Salciri Vcsu's case(2 supra) was reiterated, cate6orically. held that a Wit of Mandamus cannot be issued directing the respondents- authorities to register an FlR/crime, even though the complaint filed indicates commission of an offence.

8. This Court, in W.P.No.8I89 and 12691 of 2020, dt.3t.Ot.2O24, having regard to the provisions of the Cr.P.C., had held that in the event of the Station House OIIicer not registering the crime basing on the complaint made, the complainant has to avail the remedy of approaching the Superintendent of Police (for short 'SPJ, and in the event of the authorities, be it the SHO or the SP, refusing to receive the complaint by registering a FIR and undertaking investigation, the complainant has the further remedy of approaching the concerned Magistrate Court by frling a private complajnt; and that on the Court being pima facie satisfied of the contents of the complaint disclosing commission of a cognizable offence, the Magistrate in exercise of powers conferred under the Cr.P.C./BNSS can direct the oIficer-in- charge of the police station to conduct investigation and submit a report. The above stated procedures envisage safet5r measures to ensure registration of a complaint, even if the SHO fails to register the FIR.

9. In the facts of the present cases, admittedly, the petitioners herein did not show to this Court of they availing/exhausting the said remedies. 4

10. In view ofthe above, and having regard to the position oflaw as enunciated by the Apex Court, this Court is of the view that no direction to the respondents-authorities to register an FIR on the basis of the complajnts lodged by the petitioners, respectively, can be- 'issued. However, in the event of the petitioners being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents-authorities in not registering their complaints, it is always open for the petitioners to avail the remedy of ftling a private complaint before the concerned Criminal Court.

11. Subject to the above observations, the Writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs.

12. As a sequel miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed. No order as to costs 10u March, 2025 T. VINOD KT'MAR, J