IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.19909 OF 2019 DATE :10.02.2026 Between:

Mr.Hukmichand Bhati …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 8 others …Respondents

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 by declaring the action of the Official Respondent Nos.1 to 5 more particularly the Respondent No.5 in not registering FIR against the Unofficial Respondent Nos.6 to 9 in pursuance of the Petitioners written complaint dt.23-08-2019 as arbitrary, discriminatory, highhanded and ex-facie illegal, dereliction of duty and also violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India as well as against the legal ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari Judgment and consequently may direct the Respondent No.5 to register FIR against the Unofficial Respondent Nos.6 to 9 in pursuance of the Petitioners written complaint dt.23-08-2019 with an immediate effect, in the interest of justice..…” 2. None appeared for the petitioner.

3. Heard Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

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 position laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that the extraordinary writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked as a substitute for the statutory mechanism specifically provided under the Cr.P.C. for redressal of grievances relating to non-registration of a First Information Report. Accordingly, dismissal of the writ petition is sought.

5. I have perused the material available on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner, in substance, is that despite submission of a complaint dated 23.08.2019, the concerned police authorities have failed to register a case in accordance with law.

7. The legal position governing the issue is well settled. In Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Others (AIR 2008 SC 907), the Hon’ble Supreme Court categorically held that where the grievance pertains to the failure of the police to register an FIR, the appropriate remedy does not lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court emphasized that the Cr.P.C. provides a complete, efficacious, and statutory mechanism particularly under Sections 154(3), 156(3), and 190 enabling an aggrieved person to seek appropriate relief before the competent Magistrate.

8. This principle has been consistently reaffirmed in subsequent decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Notably, in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others (AIR 2020 SC 387), a three-Judge Bench reiterated that an aggrieved party must avail the remedies provided under the Cr.P.C., and that the writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be invoked by bypassing such statutory remedies, except in exceptional circumstances.

9. In light of the aforesaid settled legal position, and in the absence of any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be entertained. The statutory framework under the Cr.P.C., and now under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides adequate and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, which the petitioner is at liberty to pursue in accordance with law, should his grievance persist.

10. Accordingly, with the above liberty, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI Date: 10.02.2026 pld