The High Court · 2025

AND 1 . The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, 2. The Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad District, Vikarabad. 3. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Changomul village, Pudur Mandal, 4. Ramulu Begari @ Gopalla, S/o Anthaiah Began or Gopalla, Aged 45 years, R/o H No 2-62, Nizampet lvledipally village, Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad District 5. Jangaiah Begari @ Gopalla, S/o Anthaiah Begari or Gopalla, R/o H.No. 2-62, 6. Srinivas Begari @ Gopala, S/o Antaiah Begari, Aged about 35 years, R/o H No 2-62, Nizampet Medipally village, Pudur N4andal, Vikarabad District 7. Anthaiah Begari @ Gopalla, S/o Papaiah BegariorGopalla, Aged about 68 . District. 8. Chandramma Begari @ Gopalla, W/o Anthaiah Begari or Gopalla, Aged 65 years, R/o H.No. 2-62, Nizampet lt/edipally village, Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad Nizampet Medipally village, Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad District. years, R/o H No 2-62, Nizampet Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad District ...RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of lilandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in not taking action against the respondents No.4 to 8 by registering an FIR and conducting investigation on the complaints of the petitioner dated 12-O4-2O14 and 01-06-2017 as highly illegal, improper, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent No. 3 to register an FIR I I against the respondents No. 4 to 8 based on the complaints of the petitioner dated 12-04-2014 and 01-06-2017 in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017{WPMP. NO: 45972 OF 2017) Petition Lrnder 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 issue a direction to the Station House Officer, Changomulu, Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad District to register an FIR based on the complaints of the petitioner dated 12-04- 2O14 and 01-06-2017 lodged by the petitioner against the respondent Nos. 4 to 8 and investigate the matter pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MR PRABHAKAR RAO VORUGANTI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 TO 8: - (NOT PRESENT) The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITIoN No.37021 OF 2017 ORDER: 'l'his \\'rit Petition is tLled rvith the follorving rclieE "...to issuc a \\'r1t. ()rde! rlr tlirectrcln rnore Parricularh' one in the narurc of a Writ of lVandarnus dcclaring thc actic,n of the rcspondcnt No.3 in not taking action against thc rcspondents \o. 4 to ll bv registering an FIR and conclucting in\-e slllr.rtion on thc complahts of rhc pctitioncr dated 12- 04 2014 and 01-06 l()17 as hrghlv i[1cgal, unpropcr, arbirrary, unconstitutional, against rhc Principlcs of \atr,ral -fusricc and consequently dirccr the rcspondcnt N,.,. I tr, registcr an l:lil against thc rcspondcnts No- 4 ro 8 bascd on thc complaints of the petitioncr datcd 12 0-l-201.1 and 01-06-2017 in the inrctcst o[ justice... . ."

2. Nonc appcars on behalI o[ rl.rc pctitioncr.

3. Heard lcarncd Assistant (]cvernment Pleader for Ilomc appearins [or respondent N()s. 1 t() 3.

4. 'I'he lcarned ,\s-.istant (i<,r-crnrnent Pleader for Flomc subnits that thc relicI sought in tl.rc prcseot writ petition-namelv, a dir-ection to tl-re police authorities to register a crimiflal case-is not maintainabie under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in vicu, of the well-settled legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supremc Court

5. I have catefully pertrsed thc materials piaced on recotd.

6. 'l'hc grievar.rce oi the petitioner. ir.r sr-rbstance, is that despite havine rvritten t:omplaints datcd 12-0-1-201-i and 01-0(r-2017, thc conce rnerl police authoritics tailed to rcgis ter rl case. Aqsrieved br. such inacrit>n, tirc pe tidoncr has in'r',rkcd tl.rc rvrit iurisdicdon of rhis Courr under Articlc 226 oi ti.re Constiturion of India, seeking a rvrit o[ mandami-rs clirecting thc police aurlroriries to register a crlntc 1 . fl-re leeal position governin[ marters o[ rhis nature is rveil settlccl ancl no longci tu.t itie.qa. ln J'ukiri I 'u.sa a. .f tate rtl' U.P. L. Other (AII\ 2001'l SC 907), ths Hon'ble Supremc Court caregorically held tl-rat u.hen the giicr,ancc pertains tr-', the rcfusal of thc policc to rcgister a First Intbrmation l(cport (IlIR), the remedy of appr<-lacl.rine thc High Court iinder- -\rticle 226 is ordinarily not available. l'l.re Court ein;rirast;zed that thc Code o[ Criminal Proccdurc, 1973 ("Cr.I'].C.") provides an adequate and etficacious statuton' framervork to address such gticvanccs. I'his prinr:iple has bccn consistcnrly reaffirmed in subsequent judicial pr()nouncemenrs. Mosr notably, in l,t. Subramaniam a. S lanaki e: Orherr (.,\IR 2020 SC 387), a rhree-fudgc Bench of rhe I{on'ble Supreme Court clarified that the proper course for an ag;rieved party is to avail the remcdics provided under the Cr.P.C., inclirding approaching the \Iagistr-ate under Sections 156(3) or 200 Cr.P.C. rathcr than dir-ecrii' invoiiir.rs the s,rit jurisdicricln of the Hiuh Court.

9. In Light of thesc scttlcd lcs:rl prirrciples, and in the absencc of aflr cxceptional or e xrraor-c'linan' circurnstances thar would warraflr interncntion bv this Court r.rnder,\rticle 226, the relief sought by thc pctitioncr cannot bc cnrr:rtai; ir:d. 'l'hc stetutorv scherre pror,,ides sufficient and cftlcaciou: rcn:e,,lies beforc the competent N,Iagistrate, and tl're petitione -: is at irbertv ro purslrc such remedies in accordance with larv, si-rould his s-ri().,/ance sriii subsist.

10. Accordingiv, the rvrit pctltion is dismissed as not maintainable. 'I'here shall bc no olcier as to costs. N4isccllancous l)etitions. pclcling if 2n1,, shail stand closed. //rRUE coPY// SdIC.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT RE9ISTRAR e SECTION OFFICER To 1 2 2 One CC to SRI MR PRABHAKAR RAO VORUGANTI, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court forthe State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD Copies PSK, SA HIGH COURT DATED:0611012025 ORDER WP.No.37021 of 2017 /, -sr.4 (J V ? I Jfll'l 2026 z. d DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS b c \y