ORDER: The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to direct v. State of Uttar Pradesh[1] & Ors.

07.10.2011 given by the petitioner, and to take appropriate action against respondent Nos.4 to 36 who are running money lending business at usurious rates. Para 3 to 36 gives details of the money borrowed by the petitioner from the unofficial respondents; the money allegedly repaid by him; and the amount still due to be repaid. It is his case that though he is willing to repay the amount due in easy monthly instalments, he is being threatened by the respondents, and as no action was being taken by the police officials he had perforce to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. As held by the Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others[1], the petitioner has an effective remedy under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), whereunder the Magistrate concerned has not only the power to order registration of the offence, but also to direct the officer in charge of the concerned police station to hold proper investigation as also to monitor the same. In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner, I consider it wholly inappropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:21.10.2011 [1] (2008) 2 SCC 409