Gujarat High Court
Saiyad Yusufali Azharali vs State Of Gujarat on 8 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12180/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 12180 of 2025
============================================
SAIYAD YUSUFALI AZHARALI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
============================================
Appearance:
MR DAXESH D BAROT(13149) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 08/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1) By way of the present petition, the petitioner prays for following
main relief:-
"(A) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass
appropriate orders, writ or direction, directing
Commissioner of Police, Surat, Respondent No.3 herein, to
take legal action with regard to the complaint dated
31.05.2025 given by the petitioner to Police
Commissioner, Surat."
2) Perusing the nature of grievance and complaint at Annexure - A
prima facie it appears that there are no specific averments
disclosing as to in what manner cognizable offence is committed
and hence, no case is made out based on incomplete and hazy
facts. Even if the petitioner is having any grievance qua
commission of cognizable offence then also without resorting to
appropriate remedy provided under BNSS, he has straightway
approached this Court.
3) Therefore, in view of the observations made by the Apex Court
in the case of M. Subramaniam vs. S. Janki reported in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12180/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2025
undefined
(2020)16 SCC 728, and the case of XYZ vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh reported in (2023)9 SCC 705 as well as
Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage &
Ors. reported in (2016)6 SCC 277, 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.
4) With these observations, present petition is rejected. However,
the petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate proceeding before
the authority to register the complaint. This Court has not gone
into the merits of the case.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT
