The High Court should not entertain writ petitions for police action or investigation monitoring when alternative statutory remedies exist before the police and the jurisdictional Magistrate. The power of arrest is a discretionary police function, and courts should avoid interfering with ongoing investigations.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

Heard Ms. B.R.A. Sultana, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3.

2. The petitioner has instituted the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondent nos. 2 & 3 to arrest the respondent no. 4 and to recover a minor girl.

3. The projected case of the petitioner, in brief, is that her husband, who has been arraigned as the party-respondent no. 4 in this writ petition, is an Assistant Teacher of Golaghat Town Hindi High School. Alleging infidelity against the respondent no. 4, the petitioner had lodged a First Information Report [FIR] before the Officer In-Charge, Golaghat Police Station on 24.03.2025. It was inter-alia alleged that the respondent no. 4 had made a minor girl, whose date of birth is 03.05.2008, to elope with him on 28.02.2025, and thereafter, the respondent no. 4 started living with her somewhere, treating the minor girl, who was a student of Class-X, as his wife. The petitioner had alleged that the respondent no. 4 was assisted in the process by the parents of the minor girl. It had been alleged that by such act of the respondent no. 4, the lives of the petitioner and her children had been spoiled. The petitioner had further alleged that the Headmaster of the Hindi High School had illegally made Birth Certificates to change the date of birth of the minor girl in the Admit Card issued by the Assam Education Council.

4. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, Golaghat Police Station registered the same as Golaghat Police Station Case no. 64/2025 under Sections 61[2]/318[3]/316[4]/336[2] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It may be stated that on receipt of the FIR, initially, a General Diary [G.D.] Entry vide Golaghat Police Station G.D. Entry no. 21 dated 24.03.2025 was registered and a Woman Sub-Inspector [WSI] of Police was instructed to conduct an enquiry into the matter. Subsequently, the Officer In-Charge, Golaghat Police Station registered the FIR on 06.04.2025 and started investigation into the case.

5. The petitioner has raised a grievance to the effect that after registration of the case, no action had been initiated by police against the respondent no. 4 who has committed the offence of bigamy and in the process, spoiled the life of a minor girl. The respondent no. 2 and the respondent no. 3 have not been able to arrest the respondent no. 4 to recover the minor girl till date. It is in such background, the petitioner has to file the instant writ petition. 6. From the scheme contained in the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘the Code’ or ‘CrPC.’, for short] [since repealed], more particularly, Section 154 and Section 156 thereto, it was settled that if a person had a grievance that the Officer In-Charge of the concerned Police Station was not registering his/her FIR under Section 154[1], CrPC, then he/she could approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154[3] CrPC. by an application in writing. If that did not yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR was not registered till then or that even after registering it, no proper investigation had been conducted, it was open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156[3], CrPC before the jurisdictional Magistrate. If an application under Section 156[3], CrPC was filed