The High Court · 2025

5. Mr. Venkanna Sub-inspector of police, Jewaharnagar Police Station, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate, R. R(Medchel) District, Telangana. 6. MogiliPaka Venkatesh,, S/o.Mallaiah, Aged: 34 years., Occ: Driver, R/O. Plot no.82,Mohanraonagar colony, Jewaharnaga(G.P), Kapra mandal, R.R(Medchel) District, Telangana. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstanees stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Official respondent no.3 against the Respondent no.5 & 6 on the Representation of petitioner dated: 23-08- 2016,for trespassing in to the house land of the petitioner in absence of her Husband and Abused her and threateneded her with dare consequences at about 2-00 AM on 23-08-2016 at Plot no.82, in Sy.No.611, 612,613 & 606 Part situated at Balajinagar, Jewaharnagar G.P., Mohannagar colony, Kapra mandal, Medchel(R.R.) District., as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia. l.A. NO: 1OF 2017 WPMP. NO:22927 OF 20171 Petition under 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 Respondent no.2 & 3 to take proper action against the Respondent no. 5 & 6 as for the Representation dated: 23-08-201 6 as for the law time being in force, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VANKANI MALLESHAM (Not Present) Counsel for the Respondent No. 't to 4: SRI G. ANIKETH REDDY AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No. 5 & 6: -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No. 18797 OF 2017 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief "...1o issue an appropriate Writ, Order, Direction, more particulafly, one in the nature of Writ of 'Mandamus' declaing the inaction of the Official respondent No. 3 against the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 on the Representation of petitioner dated 23-08-201 6, for irespass,ng in to the house land of the petitioner in absence of her husband and abused her and threatened her with dire consequences at about 2:00 AM on 23-08-2016 at Plot No.82, in Sy. Nos. 61 1, 612, 613 and 606 Paft, situated at Balajinagar, Jewaharnagar G.P., Mohannagar Colony, Kapra Mandal, Medchel (R.R.) District, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Arlicles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and fo pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Couft deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 2 3 None appeared for the petitioner Mr. Q. Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos 1 to 4 would submit that though the respondents/Police received representation dated 23.08.201 6, as the contentions raised therein are part of the allegations in the earlier crime i.e. FIR No.480 of 2016, which was registered basing on the complaint filed by respondent No.6, no other crime has been registered. Further pleads that, if the petitioner has any grievance against 2 non-registration of complaint, she should have availed the remedies available under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as the relief sought in the present writ petition-namely, a direction to the police authorities to register a criminal case-is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, in view of the well-settled legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

4. I have carefully perused the material placed on record

5. The contention raised in the petition is that the representation of the petitioner dated 23.08.2016 has not been considered by respondent No. 3 and not acted upon. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has rnvoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 o'f lhe Constitution of lndia, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police authorities to register a crime

6. The legal position governing matters of this nature is well settled and no longer res integra. ln Saklri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Ofhers (AlR 2008 SC 907), the Hon'ble Supreme Court categorically held that when the grievance pertains to the refusal of the police to register a First lnformation Report (FlR), the remedy of approaching the High Court under Article 226 is ordinarily not available. The Court emphasized that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) provides an adequate and efficacious statutory - framework to address such grievances

7. This principle has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent judicial pronouncements. Most notably, in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others (AlR 2020 SC 387), a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that the proper course for an aggrieved party is to avail the remedies provided under the Cr.P.C., including approaching the Magistrate under Sections 156(3) or 200 Cr.P.C. rather than directly invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court

8. ln light of these settled legal principles, and in the absence of any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that would warrant intervention by this Court under Article 226, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be entertained. The statutory scheme provides sufflcient and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, and the petitioner is at liberty to pursue such remedies in accordance with law, should her grievance still subsist.

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as not maintainable There shall be no order as to costs Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. A.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR @ / SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, to SRI VANKANI MALLESHAM, Advocate IOPUC] -Ci . to Copies FOn HOtue, High Court for the Staie of Telangana' [OUT] '1. One CC 2. Two CC 3. Two CD ,fc MMT PSK I I --l I HIGH COURT DATED:0310912025 ORDER WP.No.18797 ot 2017 ( I L\ c) (J * ltE s 02 r?|l2F

4. t. I I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @'o,,'" 4 aJr\* ef,; I