IBRAHIIM v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of trrlandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in registering the FIR and investigating the matter basing on the complaints of the petitioner dated 05-08-20'16, 19-07-2O16, 28-07-2016, against the unofficial respondent herein and in registering the FIR is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Criminal Procedure code and also violation of Article 14 and 21 0f constitution of lndia besides invoilation of provisions of Criminal Procedure Code and consequently direct the official respondents to register the FIR basing on the complaint dated 05-08-2016, 19-07-2016, and 28-07 -2016 against the unofficial respondents herein and also grant police protection to safe guard the petitioners property. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 33220 OF 2016) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the )ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High CoL 1 may be pleased to direct the official respondents to register the FIR basing orr the complaints dated 05-08-2016, 19-07-2016, and 28-07-2016, against the uno f cial respondents and also grant police protection to safe guard the petition: 's property pending disposal of the above writ petition. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 35350 0F 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ;ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High O rurl psy be pleased receive the additional material papers filed by the ) )titioner herein i.e., representation dated '17-05-20'17 and permanent lnjunctic r Order daled 22-12- 2016 passed in l.A.No. 225 of 2016 in O.S.No. t 780 of :l )16 in support of his case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KATIKA RAVINDER REDD I Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 4: ASST. GP FOR HOl\ E Counsel for the Respondent No.5 & 6: - - - - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.25839 of 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief "-..lo ,ssue a writ, order or direction, more pafticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents in registering the FIR and investigating the matter basing on the complaints of the petitioner dated 05.08.2016, 19.07.2016, 28.07.2016 against the unofficial respondent herein and in registering the FIR is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Criminal Procedure Code and also violation of Atticle 14 and 21 of Constitution of lndia besides invoilatiort of provisions of Criminal Procedure Code and consequently direct the official respondents to reEster the FIR basing on the complaint dated 05.08.2016, 19.07.2016 and 28.07.2016 against the unofficial respondents herein and also grant police protection to safe guard the petitioners propefty and to pass.. . . ."

2. Heard ttflr.K.Ravidner Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner

3. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents No.1 to 4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to complaints dated 05.08.2016, 19.O7.2O16, and 28.07.2016, the police failed to register a Crime/FlR owing to the undue influence allegedly exerted by the then Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA). Consequently, counsel prays for the issuance of an appropriate direction to the Superintendent of Police or the officer concerned to ensure registration of the case.

5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader 1c. Home submits t'. -- that the relief sought in this writ petition, namely, a direction to the police authorities to register a criminal case is not n i intainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, in view c I the well-settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

6. I have perused the materials placed on record

7. The grievance of the petitioner, in essence, i; that despite his written complaints dated 05.08.2016, 19.07.2016, anc 28.07.2016, the concerned police authorities failed to register a cas ). Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner has invoked the writ j"-isdiction of this Court under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution, se t king a writ of mandamus to compel the police to register a crime.

8. The legal position governing such matters is we ll settled and no longer res integra. In Sakrr Vasu v. Sfate of U.P. & a thers (AlR 2008 SC 907), the Hon'ble Supreme Court categorically hr:l i that where the grievance pertains to the refusal of the police tc register a First Information Report (FlR), the remedy of directly apprc aching the High Court under Arlicle 226 is ordinarily not avail:rl ,le. The Court emphasized that the Code of Criminal procedure, 973 ("Cr P C.") provides a comprehensive and efficacious statutory address such grievances. mechanism to \ \ ,)

9. This principle has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent pronouncements. Most notably, in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Ofhers (AlR 2020 SC 387), a three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that the proper recourse for an aggrieved party lies in availing 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 10, ln light of these settled legal principles, and absent any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that would justify intervention under Article 226, this Court finds that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. The statutory scheme under the Cr.P.C. provides sufficient and efficacious remedies before the competent lvlagistrate, and the petitioner is at liberty to pursue such remedies in accordance with law, should his grievance still persist

11. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 One CC to SRI KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY, Advocate{OPUCI iwo CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana' luu ll . Two CD CoPies BN: GJP 4a+- HIGH COURT DATED:2410912025 t F () () * o II ( sHE ( F ,l,ri; ( J ORDER WP.No.26839 of 2016 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS NOT-MAINTAINABLE WITHOUT COSTS 6 { r.-( t\I-