Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Dunga Pentaiah vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 June, 2021
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Writ Petition No.11472 of 2021
ORDER:
The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that
the two reports lodged by them with the police on 25.05.5021
and 30.05.2021 respectively are not registered by the police.
Therefore, they sought writ of mandamus to declare the action of
the 5th respondent Sub-Inspector of Police, Jalumuru Police
Station, Srikakulam District, in not registering the said reports
as F.I.Rs. as illegal and arbitrary. Consequently, they sought
direction to the respondents to investigate the matter in view of
the judgment of the Apex Court in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya
v. State of Gujarat1.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for
respondents 1 to 5.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
report dated 30.05.2021 is now registered as a case in Crime
No.92 of 2021 of Jalumuru Police Station, Srikakulam District.
Therefore, the Writ Petition to that effect becomes infructuous.
However, it is his grievance that the other report, dated
25.05.2021 is not registered till now. Therefore, the learned
counsel for the petitioners would submit that a direction may be
given to register the said report as an F.I.R.
JT 2019 (10) SC 537
4. 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.
5. 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 Pradesh2 and the cases of like
(2014) 2 SCC 1
nature and clearly held that the writ petition is not
maintainable.
6. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as not
maintainable. In the case registered as F.I.R. in Crime No.92 of
2021, on the report, dated 30.05.2021, the Investigating Officer
has to follow the directions of the Apex Court given in Vinubhai
Haribhai Malaviya1 as regards the officer, who has to
investigate the case, as it is stated therein that the
Superintendent of Police has to investigate such cases. No
costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also
stand closed.
________________________________________________
JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Date:22.06.2021.
cs
