Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J.
K.V. Bhaskar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.13993 of 2022
Decided On : 09-11-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 226 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 420, 406, 506, 34 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 154, 156, 190, 200, 482 – Criminal Law Act – FIR – Power of High Courts to issue certain writs – Punishment for criminal breach of trust – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property – Information in cognizable cases – Cognizance of offences by magistrates – Examination of complainant – Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to give a direction to Station House Officer of II Town Police Station take cognizance of report lodged by petitioner and to register an FIR against persons offences punishable – Held, Even though no provision is incorporated in Criminal Procedure Code to give effect to recommendation of Commission, still by a Judge made law, as discussed effect is given to recommendations of Justice Verma Commission and made it obligatory on part of police to register F.I.R. irrespective of territorial jurisdiction where offence took place and then to transfer F.I.R. to concerned Police Station – Petitioner cannot rely on those judgments and seek to maintain the present Writ Petition filed for a mandamus to direct police to register an F.I.R. or a Zero F.I.R – Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of law laid down by the Apex Court case – writ for mandamus is maintainable and direction is to be given to police to register Zero F.I.R. is misconceived and unsustainable under law – Appropriate remedy is not writ and party has to avail remedies contemplated discussed in detail settled law – Writ Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
1. This Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to give a direction to the Station House Officer of II Town Police Station, Madanapalle, to take cognizance of the report lodged by the petitioner on 21.03.2022 and to register an F.I.R. or Zero F.I.R. against the persons named therein for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 506 r/w.34 of IPC.
2. Concise statement of facts, as pleaded in the writ petition, relevant to dispose of this Writ Petition may be stated as follows:
(b) The petitioner has paid Rs.3.00 Lakhs as per their demand. But, his son did not pass the examinations. Thereafter, his son again appeared for the examinations in June, 2019 without making any additional payment as demanded by Mr.Sandeep Pacchu and Mr.Prasanna Kumar over phone. So, the son of the petitioner fell unconscious due to tension on 15.07.2019. It is stated that though a sum of Rs.12.00 lakhs in total was paid, that the son of the petitioner did not pass in the examinations.
(c) So, complaining against the persons responsible for collection of money from the petitioner in Bangalore of Karnataka State to help his son to pass in the examinations, the petitioner has lodged a report dated 21.03.2022 with the Station House Officer of II Town Police Station, Madanapalle, where he is residing, in the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is alleged that the said report was not received by the Station House Officer of the said Police Station. Therefore, the petitioner has sent the said report to the Superintendent of Police through registered post. It is stated that, yet, no action is taken on the report lodged by the petitioner. Therefore, the instant Writ Petition has been filed to direct the Station House officer of II Town Police Station, Madanapalle, to register F.I.R. on the basis of the report, dated 21.03.2022, lodged by the petitioner or to register a Zero F.I.R. and then to transfer the said Zero F.I.R. to the concerned Police Station in the State of Karnataka for investigation and to file a final report in the Court.
3. Respondent No.4 Station House Officer of II Town Police Station, Madanapalle, filed counter-affidavit stating that as the grievance of the writ petitioner is relating to non-registration of the F.I.R. on the report lodged by him on 21.03.2022 relating to the incidents alleged to have taken place in the State of Karnataka, that the Writ Petition seeking direction to police to register F.I.R. is not maintainable in view of the settled legal position as held by the Apex Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., [(2008) 2 SCC 409], reiterated in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v. Hemant Yashwant Dhage, [(2016) 6 SCC 277]. It is pleaded that this Court also held in Chegireddy Venkata Reddy v. The Govt. of A.P., [Common order, dated 30.07.2020, passed in W.P.No.8384 of 2020 & Batch. (APHC)] that Writ Petition seeking mandamus for registration of F.I.R. is not maintainable as there is efficacious alternative remedy available to the aggrieved person under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefo
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of Section 154 CrPC, the concept of 'Zero FIR', and the obligation of the police to register a regular FIR on the disclosure o....
The main legal principle established is that the remedy for police failure to register an F.I.R. is not through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but through the remedie....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
