THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.42871 of 2017

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring tne inaction of the respondents No-1 to 6 in not registering F.I.R and filing charge sheet against the respondents No-7 to 9 and further not providing protection to the petitioner and her family members despite repeated representations in oral and writing, as illegal arbitrary and violative of the articles of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No-1 to 6, to register F.I.R. and file charge sheet against the respondents No-7 to 9 by providing police protection to the petitioner and her family members and to pass..…”

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits 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 principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

5. I have perused the material placed on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner, in essence, is that despite submission of a written complaint dated 08.08.2017, the concerned police authorities failed to register a First Information Report (FIR). The legal position governing such matters is well settled and in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Others, AIR 2008 SC 907, the Hon’ble Supreme Court categorically held that where a person’s grievance relates to the refusal or failure of the police to register a First Information Report, the proper course is not to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226, but to pursue the remedies expressly provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court emphasized that the Cr.P.C. provides a complete and efficacious mechanism for redressal of such grievances and cautioned that the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 or Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be invoked when adequate statutory remedies exist and have not been exhausted.

7. The above principle has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Most notably, in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others, AIR 2020 SC 387, a three- Judge Bench reiterated that in cases of alleged police inaction, the aggrieved person must first avail the statutory remedies provided under the Cr.P.C., and directly invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is impermissible, except in rare and exceptional circumstances.

8. In view of the settled legal position and in the absence of any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances in the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the relief sought by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be entertained.

9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However the rights of the petitioner are reserved to avail appropriate remedy available under law, if the cause still subsists. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N. TUKARAMJI, J Date: 13.10.2025

CHS

271 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.42871 of 2017 DATE: 13.10.2025

CHS