##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No.14959 OF 2019

DATE : 22.01.2026

Between:

Smt. Sunkari

…Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana & Others

…Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue an order or direction more

particularly one in the nature of Writ of

Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th

respondent in not registering F.I.R for the

cognizable offence on the petitioners

complaint dated 9.4.2019 and issuing

notice under Section 157 (2) of Cr.P.C to the

petitioner on 5.7.2019 with antedate

18.4.2019 as arbitrary and illegal and

pass…”

2. Heard Ms. B.Pallavi, learned counsel for the petitioner

and

##PAGE2##

2

Sri D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home

appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home

submits that upon receipt of the petitioner’s representation, a

General Diary (GD) entry was made and a preliminary enquiry

was conducted by the respondent police. Upon such

preliminary enquiry, it was found that the dispute essentially

pertained to civil matters arising out of business transactions

involving the taking and returning of money. In view of the said

findings, the police did not register a First Information Report

(FIR), and the same was duly communicated to the petitioner

by way of a notice.

4. I have perused the material available on record.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that his representation

dated 09.04.2019 was not acted upon by the respondent police

by registering a crime. However, the explanation offered by the

respondent police demonstrates that, in exercise of their

jurisdictional discretion and after conducting a preliminary

enquiry, they consciously chose not to register an FIR. The

##PAGE3##

3

record indicates that the allegations were found to relate to a

civil dispute, and therefore did not disclose the commission of

a cognizable offence warranting registration of a criminal case.

6. It is well settled that the registration of an FIR is

mandatory only when the information discloses the

commission of a cognizable offence, as held by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh

(2014) 2 SCC 1. The said decision also recognizes that a

preliminary enquiry is permissible in cases involving

commercial transactions, financial disputes, and matters of a

predominantly civil nature, in order to ascertain whether a

cognizable offence is made out.

7. In the present case, the respondent police, after

conducting such a preliminary enquiry, formed an opinion that

no criminal offence was disclosed. Consequently, the

contention of the petitioner that there was inaction on the part

of the respondent police is unfounded and contrary to the

material on record.

##PAGE4##

4

8. However, if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision

of the police not to register an FIR, the proper course available

to him is to avail the statutory remedies provided under the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, including remedies under

Sections 154(3), 156(3), or 200 Cr.P.C., as the case may be,

rather than invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

9. Accordingly, reserving the rights of the petitioner to avaial

appropriate remedies avainable, as per law, this Writ Petition is

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________

N.TUKARAMJI, J

Date: 28.01.2026

hk

##PAGE5##

5

73

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No. 14959 OF 2019

Dated: 28.01.2026

hk

Click Here to Read the rest of this document