Space World vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) - Sections 173, 175(3), 210 and 223 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 154, 156(3), 190 and 200 - Registration of FIR - Police inaction - Mandamus - A writ petition seeking a direction for the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) cannot be entertained where alternative and efficacious statutory remedies are available under the law. If police authorities fail to record information regarding a cognizable offence, the aggrieved person can approach the Superintendent of Police or the concerned Magistrate (Paras 10-12).

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope and limitation - High Courts should discourage the filing of writ petitions under Article 226 or petitions under Section 482 of the CrPC simply because an FIR has not been registered or a proper investigation has not been conducted. Such grievances must be addressed through the prescribed legal channels before the Magistrate (Paras 10 and 11).

(C) Private Property Disputes - Matters relating to the usurping of property which are private in nature do not typically fall under the "rarest of rare" category of clear abuse of power or malice that would justify the invocation of extraordinary writ jurisdiction to micromanage investigations (Para 13).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, owner of a multi-storey building, alleged that a private party forcibly took possession of the entire premises despite only leasing one floor. Following the failure of the lessee to pay rent and subsequent illegal dispossession of the petitioner and other tenants, the petitioner filed complaints with police authorities. Upon the police's failure to register an FIR, a writ petition was filed seeking a mandamus for the registration of the FIR, restoration of possession, and guidelines against illegal land occupation.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner has alternative and efficacious remedies available under the BNSS/CrPC, specifically by approaching the Superintendent of Police or filing an application before the Magistrate. The matter is essentially a private property dispute in nature.

Issues: Whether a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be issued to direct the police to register an FIR in a private property dispute when alternative statutory remedies under the BNSS/CrPC are available.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that statutory remedies for police inaction (such as approaching the Superintendent of Police or the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS / 156(3) CrPC) must be exhausted before approaching the High Court. Writ jurisdiction is not the first recourse for FIR registration unless there is a clear abuse of power or malice, which was absent in this private dispute (Para 14).

Result: Petition dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerning Magistrate by filing a proper application under Section 175(3) of BNSS (Section 156(3) of CrPC) or by filing a private complaint under Section 223 of BNSS (Section 200 of CrPC).

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Private property dispute — Police inaction on complaint — Writ seeking mandamus for FIR registration and restoration of possession. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )

2. Petitioner seeks mandamus for police action; State contends alternative remedy under BNSS/CrPC exists and writ is not maintainable. (Para 4 , 5 )

3. Petition dismissed — Petitioner directed to approach Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC or 175(3) BNSS or file private complaint. (Para 15 )

4. Can a writ of mandamus be issued to direct police to register an FIR when an alternative statutory remedy exists?

No, the High Court should not ordinarily entertain a writ petition for FIR registration if the aggrieved person has an alternative remedy under Section 154(3) and 156(3) CrPC (now BNSS). (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 )

5. What is the proper remedy for a person aggrieved by police refusal to register an FIR?

The remedy is to approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) CrPC, and if that fails, to file an application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or file a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC. (Para 10 , 14 )

6. Can the High Court interfere in property disputes through writ jurisdiction under Article 226?

No, private property disputes between individuals are not amenable to writ jurisdiction; the proper remedy is civil litigation or criminal complaint before the Magistrate for police inaction. (Para 5 , 13 )

ORDER :

Vishal Mishra, J.

This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :

(i) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the Respondent No. 1 to Respondent No. 5 to forthwith take all necessary and immediate legal action, including but not limited to, registering an FIR on the basis of Petitioner’s complaints against Respondent No. 6 and initiating a criminal investigation against the other perpetrators, and taking coercive steps to remove the unlawful occupation and criminal elements from the Petitioner's property at Plot No. 35, Indira Press Complex, Zone-1, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal.

(ii) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the Respondent No. 1 to Respondent No. 5 to ensure the complete and peaceful possession of the Petitioner's property is restored to him.

(iii) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ or order passing directions/guidelines to Respondent No. 1 to Respondent No. 5 to ensure that law and order situations arising due to the illegal activities of Goondaism and Rowdyism perpetrated by Bhu Mafia within the State of Madhya Pradesh are checked and prevented and submit compliance report to this Hon’ble Court.

(iv) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ or order formulating guidelines to be followed by Respondent No.2 to Respondent No.5 in circumstances of illegal occupation of properties by anti-social elements belonging to Bhu Mafia.

(v) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ or order directing suitable disciplinary action to be taken against all the public servants involved whose inaction has compelled filing of the instant writ petition.

2. The facts of the case, in substance, is that the petitioner firm represented through partner Shri Ashok Palod is a perpetual lessee of plot located at Plot No. 35, Indirai Press Complex, Zone-1, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal. On the said plot, the petitioner has constructed a multi-storey building comprising of ground floor and three additional storeys. The petitioner occupies the ground, second, and third floors. M/s Arpan Media Private Limited approached the petitioner and expressed its desire to hire the first floor on rent for running a media house. The offer was accepted and the first floor of the premises was leased vide lease agreement dated 01.09.2014 which was extended vide another lease agreement dated 16.05.2016. However, the Company defaulted in making payment of monthly rent.

3. It is submitted that the private respondent No.6 acting on behalf of the lessee has illegally and forcibly taken over control and possession of the entire premises of the petitioner despite being given only first floor on lease. Despite being completely unknown to the petitioner, respondent No.6 has affixed a poster on the main gate of the building premises making public declaration threatening people to not get into any leasehold arrangement with the petitioner. By playing violent tactics, respondent No. 6 has forcefully dispossessed the petitioner as well as his other tenants using unfair means and thereby endangering life and personal liberty of the petitioner and his tenants which is assured by the Constitution of India. Article 21 of the Constitution stipulates that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. It is further submitted that the present case is a clear example of frequent and ongoing instances of criminal trespass and forceful occupation of property by self- declared messiahs of society often known as “Bhoo Mafia”, a mushrooming menace within the whole Nation and especially within the State of Madhya Pradesh which requires interference by the hands of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. It is argued by petitioner's counsel that the complaints/applications submitted by the petitioner before the police authorities are n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 686

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Vishal Mishra, J.
M/S Space World – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 49744 of 2025
Decided On : 15-01-2026

A writ petition for the registration of an FIR is not maintainable if alternative statutory remedies, such as approaching the Superintendent of Police or the Magistrate under the BNSS/CrPC, are available, especially in private disputes lacking evidence of institutional malice or abuse of power.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a writ of mandamus be issued to direct police to register an FIR when an alternative statutory remedy exists?

5. What is the proper remedy for a person aggrieved by police refusal to register an FIR?

6. Can the High Court interfere in property disputes through writ jurisdiction under Article 226?

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 686

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPURVishal Mishra, J.M/S Space World – PetitionerVersusThe State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – RespondentsWrit Petition No. 49744 of 2025Decided On : 15-01-2026

A writ petition for the registration of an FIR is not maintainable if alternative statutory remedies, such as approaching the Superintendent of Police or the Magistrate under the BNSS/CrPC, are available, especially in private disputes lacking evidence of institutional malice or abuse of power.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a writ of mandamus be issued to direct police to register an FIR when an alternative statutory remedy exists?

5. What is the proper remedy for a person aggrieved by police refusal to register an FIR?

6. Can the High Court interfere in property disputes through writ jurisdiction under Article 226?

Cases Referred (5)

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Vishal Mishra, J.
M/S Space World – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 49744 of 2025
Decided On : 15-01-2026