Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Neha Sharma, vs The State Of Ap
2021 Latest Caselaw 2027 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2027 AP
Judgement Date : 17 June, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Neha Sharma, vs The State Of Ap on 17 June, 2021
                                1




 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

               WRIT PETITION No.11228 of 2021
ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is

that the report lodged by her before the police is not

registered as F.I.R. and the same is not investigated.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for

respondents 1 to 3.

3. The legal position in this regard is no more res integra

and the same has been well settled as per the authoritative

pronouncements of the Apex Court as well as this High Court.

Now it is well settled law that when police failed to register the

F.I.R. based on the report lodged by any individual disclosing

commission of a cognizable offence, his remedy is not by way

of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, but he has to exhaust the other remedies which are

available to him under Section 154(3), 156(3) and Section 190

r/w.Sec.200 of Cr.P.C.

4. Considering the earlier judgments of the Apex Court

rendered on the same issue, this Court in a batch of writ

petitions, disposed of on 30.07.2020 in W.P.No.8384 of 2020

and batch, held that when police failed to register F.I.R. based

on the report lodged with them, which discloses commission

of a cognizable offence, the remedy of the aggrieved person is

not by way of a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, but only by way of exhausting the other remedies

contemplated under Cr.P.C. i.e. under Section 154(3), 156(3)

and Section 190 r/w.Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. and held that the writ

petition seeking such direction to the police to register the

F.I.R. is not maintainable. In the aforesaid judgment, this

Court has also clearly explained the distinction between the

ratio laid down in Lalitha Kumari v. State of Uttar Pradesh1

and the cases of like nature and clearly held that the writ

petition is not maintainable.

5. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as not

maintainable. No costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also

stand closed.

________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

Date:17.06.2021.

AKN

(2014) 2 SCC 1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

WRIT PETITION No.11228 of 2021

Date: 17-06-2021

AKN

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter