THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not registering the case against the respondents 5 to 7 on complaint dated 21-12-2016 given by the petitioner for forging and fabricating certificates by the respondents 5 to 7 in respect of petitioner’s plot and issued by the 5^th respondent Sarpanch in the name of the 7^th respondent as if he is the owner of the house in respect of the plot of the petitioner and basing on the said certificate registered the same in the name of his wife 6^th respondent is highly arbitrary, bad and illegal and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to take action against the respondents 5 to 7 pursuant to the complaint dated 21-12-2016

and pass such other order or orders...”

2. I have heard Mr. B.Chennaiah, learned counsel, representing Mr. P. Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for

respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as respondent Nos. 2 to 4 failed to take necessary action by registering a criminal case on the basis of the written complaint lodged by the petitioner against respondent

Nos. 5 to 7, the present writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate directions from this Court.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, contends that the relief sought in the present writ petition, namely, a direction to the police authorities to register a criminal case is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of the well-settled legal position laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

5. I have carefully perused the material placed on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner, in essence, is that despite submitting a written complaint dated 21.12.2016, the concerned police authorities failed to register a criminal case. Aggrieved by such alleged inaction, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police authorities to register an FIR.

7. The issue raised herein is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Others, AIR 2008 SC 907, and M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others, AIR 2020 SC 387, has categorically held that a person aggrieved by the non-registration of an FIR cannot directly invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution without first exhausting the statutory remedies provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). 8. In light of the settled legal position and in the absence of any exceptional circumstances warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court is of the considered view that the relief sought by the petitioner seeking a direction to the police authorities to register a criminal case is not maintainable in writ jurisdiction. However, it is made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate statutory remedies before the competent authority or Court, including by submitting a fresh complaint, if the cause of action continues to subsist.

9. With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.11.2025 svl