The High Court · 2025

Petition under 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 lssue an order, direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ (i) declare the inaction of the Police in not registering FIR on the complaint given on 26-04'2017 and 17 -05-2017 as well as 17 -O7 -2017 is illegal arbitrary violating the natural justice and fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of lndia, consequently direct the respondents to register case against the unofficial respondents basing on the petitioner above said complaints i.e on 26-04-2017 and 17- 05-2017 as well as 17-O7-2017 and to take necessary action as per Law l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 33673 OF 20171 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in th : circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Crr rd may be pleased to direct the respondents to register case against the unoffi<,i rl respondents basing on the petitioner above said complaints i.e on 26- 04-201 7 3i 17-05-2017 as well as 17 -O7 -2017 and to take necessary action as per Law Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G. L. NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to6: SRI R. LA,\MIKAI\ fH REDDY, AGP FOR H() IIE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.7&8:- The Court made the following: ORDER -;tst THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI wRlT PETITION No.27103 OF 2017 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief "...1o issue an order, direction, parlicularly one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus or any other appropriate wit (i) declare the inaction of the Police in not registeing FIR on the complaint given on 26.04.2017 and 17.05.2017 as well as 17.07.2017, as illegal, arbitrary, violating the natural justice and fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of lndia, consequently direct the respondents to register case against the unofficial respondents basing on the above said complaints i.e. on 26-04-2017 and 17-05-2017 as well as 17-07-2017 and to take necessary action as per Law and pass such other order or orders. . ."

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner

3. l\Ir. R. Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleaderfor Home, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 6, submits that 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- 2 A"R,J llt'.P. Nc. 271D of 20/7

5. The grievance of the petitioner, in substance ir that despite having written complaints dated 26.04.2017, 17.05.2017 zrd 17.02.2017, the concerned Police authoflties failed to register a cas€. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdictic,r of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, seeking il writ of mandamus directing the police authorities to register a crime.

6. The legal position governing matters of this natu er is well settled and no longer res integra. ln Sakiri Vasu v. State of lJ p 8, Others (AlR 2008 SC 907), the Hon'ble Supreme Court categorically reld that when the grievance pertains to the refusal of the police to regislr r a First lnformation Report (FlR), the remedy of approaching the High Cou- under Article 226 is ordinarily not available. The Court emphasized that l el Code of Criminal Procedure, 'l 973 ("Cr.P.C") (now Bharatiya Nagant< Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) provides an adequate and efficacious statutory f- rrnework to address such grievances.

7. This principle has been consistenfly reaffirmed irr subsequent judicial pronouncements. Most notably, in M. Subramaniam v. !) Janaki & Others (AlR 2020 SC 387), a Three-Judge Bench of the Horr lle Supreme Court clarified that the proper course for an aggrieved pz rty is to avail the remedies provided under the Cr.p.C., including approa. ring the Magistrate 3 An&/ W.P. No. 27/ 03 of 2017 under Sections 156(3) or 200 Cr.P.C., rather than directly invoking the writ I jurisdiction of the High Court. B. 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 sufficient and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, and the petitioner is at liberty to pursue such remedies in accordance with law, should his 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/. M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFI CER \ To, 1 2 3 . ?,ffi 33J%'3i F.h ilAft="1H,lf 5f,?aiYfrSl!?"ts Hvderabad [OUT] Triro CD CoPies PUC] of Telangana at BM HIGH COURT DATED:2310912025 ORDER WP.No.27103 of 2017 I o() :.i 'tdE S14; 0 [t8 I * I\ SPA * DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITI{OUT COSTS U\,'