Telangana High Court
Sri A.Sampath Rao vs The State Of Telangana on 20 November, 2025
Author: N.Tukaramji
Bench: N.Tukaramji
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No.36203 OF 2018
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:
"...to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 without considering the petitioner's complaint dated 15-09-2018 and registering the crime and investigation against the Respondent No.5 is illegal, it arbitrary un-constitutional and against the principles of natural justice and as such pass..."
2. Heard Mr. L.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 15.09.2018, the respondent police authorities failed to register a crime/FIR. Accordingly, the learned counsel prays for issuance of an appropriate direction to the respondent police authorities or the officer concerned to ensure registration of the case.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that, upon consideration of the petitioner's representation dated 15.09.2018, it was found that the dispute is civil in nature. Accordingly, the petitioner was advised to avail appropriate civil remedies. It is further submitted that if the petitioner was still 2 aggrieved, he ought to have availed the statutory remedies provided under law. The learned Assistant Government Pleader contends 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 principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. I have perused the material placed on record.
6. The grievance of the petitioner, in essence, is that despite submission of a written complaint dated 15.09.2018, the concerned police authorities failed to register a case. The legal position governing such matters is well settled. 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 failure of the police to register a First Information Report (FIR), the appropriate remedy is not to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226. The Court emphasized that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") provides an adequate and efficacious statutory mechanism for redressal of such grievances.
7. This principle has been consistently reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in subsequent judgments. Notably, in M. 3 Subramaniam v. S. Janaki & Others (AIR 2020 SC 387), a three- Judge Bench reiterated that an aggrieved party must avail the statutory remedies provided under the Cr.P.C., including approaching the Magistrate under Sections 156(3) or 200, rather than directly invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
8. In view of the 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. / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides sufficient and efficacious remedies before the competent Magistrate, which the petitioner is at liberty to pursue in accordance with law, if his grievance still survives.
9. Accordingly, with the aforesaid liberty, this 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: 20.11.2025 dpm 4 73 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.36203 OF 2018 Dated: 20.11.2025 dpm