ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue a Writ. Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent police in not investigation/not register the FIR against the unofficial respondent no. 4 to 7, basing on the complaint dated 03/04/2025, 09/04/2025 and 30/08/2025, is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles natural justice and also violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents police to entertain the petitioners complaint dated 03/04/2025, 09/04/2025 and 30/08/2025 and investigate/register the FIR against the unofficial respondents 5 to 7 and to pass…”

2. Heard Sri Nikita Goenka, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and perused the record.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, basing on the written instructions furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Charakinda Police Station Nagarkurnool District would submit that, pursuant to the complaints made by the petitioner, respondent No.3 conducted enquiry and after conducting enquiry the respondent-police closed the said complaints as “civil in nature” and the said information was communicated to the petitioner through SMS/Petition Management System and nothing remains in this writ petition to adjudicate further. It is further submitted that the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy to file a private complaint before the Magistrate concerned. Therefore, he prayed this Court to dismiss the writ petition.

4. In Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.¹2008 (1) SCC(CRI) 440, the Hon’ble Apex Court, while dealing with the powers of the Court to issue a writ of mandamus, directed the police to register an F.I.R. and held as under:-

“25. We have elaborated on the above matter because we often find that when someone has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered at the police station and/or a proper investigation is not being done by the police, he rushes to the High Court to file a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not encourage this practice and should ordinarily refuse to interfere in such matters, and relegate the petitioner to his alternating remedy, firstly under Section 154(3) and Section 36 Cr.P.C. before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3).

26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police station his first remedy is to approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in Section 36 Cr.P.C. If despite approaching the Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to in Section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can approach a Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are so many alternative remedies?”

5. Recently, in M.Subramaniam and another v. S.Janaki and another, (2020) 16 SCC 728 the Hon’ble Apex Court relying upon its judgment in Sakiri Vasu (1 supra), held as under:-

“5. While it is not possible to accept the contention of the appellants on the question of locus standi, we are inclined to accept the contention that the High Court could not have directed the registration of F.I.R. with a direction to the police to investigate and file the final report.”

6. Recording the said submissions, taking the written instructions as part of the record and taking into consideration the above p