Gujarat High Court
Vikramsinh Pruthvisinh Zala vs State Of Gujarat on 2 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4856/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 4856 of 2025
==========================================================
VIKRAMSINH PRUTHVISINH ZALA & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. BHARGAV K MEHTA(7094) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR MANAN MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 02/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat.
2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner prays for direction directing the respondent No.2 to register the FIR in connection with complaint submitted by the petitioner on 08.01.2025 as the same discloses commission of a cognizable offence and further direct the said police officers to investigate the same in accordance with law, in the interest of justice.
3. When the matter is called out, learned counsel for the petitioner has remained absent. However, with an assistance of ld. APP, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
4. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has vehemently submitted before all the authorities but no cognizance is taken by them and hence, he is constrained to approach this Court. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the order dated 30.09.2020 of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in the case of J.Vijayan V/s. The Superintendent of Police & Ors. He has submitted that the petitioner has already made an application dated 08.01.2025 to the concerned Police Inspector with regard Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jul 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 04 00:53:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4856/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025 undefined to the registration of the FIR, but nothing has been done.
5. At this stage, it would be apposite to consider the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of M. Subramaniam vs. S. Janki reported in (2020)16 SCC 728, and the case of XYZ vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2023)9 SCC 705 .
6. While referring to the judgment of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage & Ors. reported in (2016)6 SCC 277 and M. Subramaniam vs. S. Janki reported in (2020)16 SCC 728, it is observed that if the High Courts entertain such writ petitions seeking registration of FIR, then they will be flooded with such writ petitions and will not be able to do any other work, except dealing with them. It is specifically held that the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under section 175(3) of the BNSS [section 156(3) of CrPC] and if he does so, the Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the FIR and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter. While approving the aforenoted view, the Supreme Court has set aside the direction of the High Court for registration of the FIR and has directed the respondent thereto to approach the court of Magistrate if deem appropriate and necessary. Thus, the law on the registration of FIR is well settled and has been reiterated in the recent judgment of the Supreme Court as noted herein above.
7. In the present case, the petitioner has not approached the concerned Magistrate and has directly approached this Court for the aforesaid prayer.
8. Under the circumstances and in light of the observations made by the Apex Court, the writ petition is rejected since the petitioner has the remedy to approach the concerned Magistrate under section 175(3) of the BNSS [section 156(3) of CrPC].
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jul 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 04 00:53:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4856/2025 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025 undefined
9. It is noticed by this Court that various petitions seeking registration of FIR are being filed before this Court directly without approaching the concerned Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS [section 156(3) of CrPC]. Such applications which are directly filed are in direct conflict with the observations of the Apex Court. The Apex Court has expressed its concern with regard to filing of such applications/petitions directly before the High Court since filing of such petitions/applications are an unnecessary burden.
10. With these observations, present petition is rejected. It is hereby made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. Rule is hereby discharged.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SUCHITKUMAR PATEL(HC01083) on Thu Jul 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 04 00:53:28 IST 2025