THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.39450 OF 2017

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…Issue a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned inaction of the respondents in registering the complaint made by the petitioner which is forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Khammam on 31.10.2014 till date as arbitrary, illegal, capricious, high handed and is in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart form being in violation of the Statutory provisions of Protection of Atrocities on Schedule Castes Act, 1989 (POA Act of 1989) and the Guidelines laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in Lalitha Kumari Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others in W.P. (Criminal) No. 68 of 2008 dated 12.11.2013 reported apart from being in violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play and consequently direct the respondents to register the case and proceed with investigation expeditiously under law 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. The 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 position laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

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

6. The grievance of the petitioners, in substance, is that despite having written complaint dated 31.10.2014, the concerned police authorities failed to register a case. Aggrieved by such 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 a crime.

7. The legal position governing matters of this nature is well settled and no longer res integra. In Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Others (AIR 2008 SC 907), the Hon’ble Supreme Court categorically held that when the grievance pertains to the refusal of the police to register a First Information Report (FIR), the remedy of approaching the High Court under Article 226 is ordinarily not available. The Court emphasized that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) provides an adequate and efficacious statutory framework to address such grievances.

8. This principle has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent judicial pronouncements. Most notably, in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others (AIR 2020 SC 387), a three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court clarified that the proper course for an aggrieved party is to avail the remedies provided under the Cr.P.C., including approaching the Magistrate under Sections 156(3) or 200 Cr.P.C. rather than directly invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

9. In light of these settled legal principles, and in the absence of any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that would warrant intervention by this Court under Article 226, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be entertained. The statutory scheme provides sufficient and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, and the petitioner is at liberty to pursue such remedies in accordance with law, should his grievance still subsist.

10. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________

N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 09-10-2025 mmr