Oia in Sakln Vasu v. State of u.p. Others t

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus dectaring the action of the Respondents No. 2 to 6 in refusing to receive the petitioners complaint dated 18..1 1.2018 for Registration of FIR against the 7th respondent in cheating the petitioner without paying the bills for the months i.e., September to November with regard to supplying of man power (House keeping service) by the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, contrary to law and principles of natural justice and consequenlly direct the Respondent No. 2 to 6 to take appropriate steps to recover the amounts fron he 7th respondent payable to the petitioner by registering FIR against the 7th r:;pondent basing on the petitioner representation dated 18'11'2018' IA NO : 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ lmstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct lounts from the 7th the Respondent No 2 to 6 to take steps to recover the €r respondent payable to the petitioner by registering FIR agairr ' the 7th respondent basing on the petitioners representation dated 1g.11.2019 p,: rding disposal ofthe Writ petition before this Hon'ble court' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI E' SRIMANTH REDDY(NONt APPEARED) Counsel for the Respondent Nos'1 to 6: SRI D' PRADEEP' r 'GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No'7:--- The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI wRlT PETITION No. 46237 OF 2018 DATE:02.12.2025 Between : Saggam Venkatesham AND Petitioner The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and six others. Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief ",..to ,'ssue a Wit or direction more padiculady one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaing the action of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in refusing to receive the petitioner's complaint dated 18-11-2018 for registration of FIR against the lh respondent in cheating the petitioner without paying the bills for the months i.e., September to November with regard to supplying of man power (Housekeeping service) by the petitioner is illegal, ahitrary, unconstitutional, contrary to law and pinciples of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondenl Nos- 2 to 6 to take appropiate steps to recover the amounts from the lh respondent payabte to the petitioner by registeing FIR against the 14' z N-flr,/ ll'. '. No. 462)7 ol 201 I respondent basing on the petitioner reFt )sentation dated 18-1 1 -2018 and pass such other or fufther orders ''

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner

3. Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government PIe ader for Home' appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 6, submits that' upor )onsideration of the petitioner's representation, since its contents disclos': i a grievance of a civil nature, no criminal case was registered. Th: petitioner was accordinglyadvisedtoavailthecivilremediesavail;'bleunderlaw' However, if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the allegec non-registration of a crime, he ought to have pursued the statutory r<: nedies available undertheCodeofCriminalProcedure,lgT3("Cr.P.t)').ltisawell- settledlegalpositionthat,withoutfirstexhaustingtheremediesavailable under the Cr.P.C. (or the corresponding provisions urri ler the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), and in the abserr e of exceptional circumstances, a prayer for a direction to register a ol me under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia is not maintainable Accordingly' the learned Assistant Government Pleader prays that tlr I writ petition be dismissed. 4 I have perused the material available on record ' / i I I J NT&/ IV.P. No. 46D7 o-f 201 8

5. The substance of the petitioner's grievance is that, despite submifting a written complaint dated 18.11.201g, the concerned police authorities failed to register a criminal case. Having regard to the explanation offered by the respondents, it is evident that the police, upon exercising their jurisdictional discretion, decided not to register a crime as the matter appeared to be civil in nature. Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondents/police authorities failed to consider the petitioner's representation.

6. lf the petitioner remains aggrieved by the alleged non-registration of a crime, the appropriate course open to him is to avail the statutory remedies provided under the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (,,BNSS"), as applicable.

7. lt is now well settled that, without first exhausting the efficacious statutory remedies available under the Cr.p.C. or the BNSS, a writ petition seeking a direction under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia for registration of a crime simpticiter is not maintainable. This legal position has been authoritatively affirmed by the Hon'ble supreme court gf,!1Oia in Sakln Vasu v. State of u.p. & Others t(2008) 2 SCC 409 : AtR 4 NTR,/ '.P. Na. 46237 o/ 201 8 2008 SC 9071 and M. Subramaniam v. S' Janaki & Ctt rers [(2020) 16 SCC 728 :AlR 2020 SC 387I ln view of the settled legal position' and since the p etitioner has not

8. availed the statutory remedies available under the cr.F. ). or the BNSS, and there being no exceptional circumstances warrall ing interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, this lourt is of the considered opinion that the relief sought by the 1 etitioner is not maintainable

9. Accordingly, while reserving the liberty of the c:titioner to avail appropriate remedies before the jurisdictional tVlagistrrr e in accordance with law, if the cause of action still survives, this writ pe :ition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall s and closed' Sd/.A.H.I ,. GOWRI SHANKAR AS S STANT REGISTRAR /TTRUE COPY// I sEcrtol oFFlcER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, The State of Telangana' Honl' Department' Secretariai, HYderabad'

2. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad at Gachibowli' Hyderabad 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police' Cyberabad at (l rchibowli' Hyderabad 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police' Gachibowli' Cyb 5. The Circle lnspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Statir l' Cyberabad' 6. The Sub-lnspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Statio r Cyberabad' Ctfu abad' Hyderabad' " Hvderabad. \ 1- I

7. The authorized, M/s. F5 Drive lnn, Office at Opp. SpAR Hyper Market, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowti - 500 032. Cyberatiad, HyOerabdO.

8. One CC to Sri E. Srimanth Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP_for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] TJ

10. Two CD Copies &, i i t I I I I I I I l t I I I i I I i l J : i .a HIGH COURT DATED:0211212025 ORDER WP.No.46237 of 2O1B i{ES o 1 ', U[q 2f]2fi s u C) Jr I * Ft r. ar,^ !'C * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ f<s ,tl"\r,