GAHC010240022025 2025:GAU-AS:15288

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/6348/2025

SWARUP JYOTI NATH

S/O- TAPAN NATH, RESIDENT OF WARD NO 16, SARADAMOYEE PATH, COLONY BAZAR, BHASKAR NAGAR, BINOVA NAGAR, GUWAHATI, P.S.

FATASIL AMBARI, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN -781018.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.

OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY- 06.

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

DISPUR ASSAM GHY- 07.

3:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

ANANDA RAM BARUAH ROAD

PANBAZAR

DIST- KAMRUP METRO

ASSAM

PIN- 781001.

4:THE OFFICER -IN- CHARGE

FATASIL AMBARI POLICE STATION

FATASIL AMBARI

GUWAHATI- 25

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M H LASKAR, MR. S ROY,M. HOSSAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

ORDER

Date : 12.11.2025 Heard Mr. M.H. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for all the respondents.

2. The petitioner has claimed that he is running a business from a rented shop since 2017-2018 in the name and style of M/s Shree Guru Bastralaya and the shop is located at Kalapahar, Bhaskarnagar, Guwahati, District – Kamrup [Metro]. The petitioner has alleged that since starting of his business, a person from the locality has been harassing him by continuously demanding protection money illegally. The petitioner has stated that initially, he gave the money out of fear for life and property. Recently, the said person had demanded an exorbitant amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-. When the petitioner refused to provide the same, the said person accompanied with others had given a beating to the petitioner. The petitioner has further stated that when the petitioner told him that he would call the police, the said person said that he had good connection with the police as his brothers are in police and are lawyers.

3. The petitioner has stated that he initially went to lodge a complaint before the respondent no. 4 on 16.02.2025. As the respondent no. 4 refused to receive the complaint filed by the petitioner, the petitioner submitted a written complaint online in the Assam Police Portal. As the same remained without any response, the petitioner had to approach the respondent no. 3 by way of a written complaint dated 07.10.2025. As the written complaint dated 07.10.2025 also has not evoked any response, the petitioner is before this Court by the instant writ petition seeking inter-alia direction to the respondent authorities to register the complaint submitted by the petitioner as an First Information Report [FIR]

forthwith.

4. The petitioner had an appropriate remedy under Section 156 [3] of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC], 1973 and presently, has the alternative remedy, under Section

175 [3] read with Section 173 [4] of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

5. The provisions contained in Section 156 [3], CrPC had provided for a check by the Magistrate on the Police performing his duties under Chapter XII, CrPC. There was an implied power in the Magistrate under Section 156 [3], CrPC to order registration of a criminal offence and/or to direct the Officer In-Charge of the concerned Police Station to hold a proper investigation and take all such necessary steps that might be necessary for ensuring a proper investigation including monitoring of the same.

6. Sub-section [3] of Section 156, CrPC read as under :-

156. Police Officer’s power to investigate cognizable case –

[1] * * * * * * * [2] * * * * * * *

[3] Any Magistrate empowered under Section 190 may order such an investigation as above-mentioned.

7. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has since been replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [‘the BNSS’, for short]. Sub-section [3] of Section 175 of the BNSS reads as under :-

175. Police Officer’s power to investigate cognizable case-

[1] * * * * * * * [2] * * * * * * *

[3] Any Magistrate empowered under Section 210 may, afte