B. Santoli, vs Prl.Secy., Home Dept., State Of T.S.,
2025 Latest Caselaw 6459 Tel

Telangana High Court

B. Santoli, vs Prl.Secy., Home Dept., State Of T.S., on 12 November, 2025

Author: N.Tukaramji

Bench: N.Tukaramji

       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

               WRIT PETITION No.21165 OF 2018

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

"...to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondent No.2, in not registering the complaint dated 02-04- 2018, of the petitioner, for forgery and other offences against accused for failing to discharge duty with responsibility and accountability by 4th respondent against accused, which is highly illegal, unconstitutional, against the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play and amounts to disobeying directions 1st and 3rd respondents in not registering complaint within half hour on receipt of the same by 2nd respondent and prays to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint of the petitioners dt.02-04-2018, and conduct detailed investigation into the matter and pass...."

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

3. I have heard Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits

that the respondent police have received a representation of the

petitioner dated 02.04.2018 and as the averments are not making

the cognizable offence, the same was not registered as crime.

However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by non registration of crime

he should have availed statutory remedies and petition under

Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking a direction for

registration, is not maintainable.

5. I have perused the materials on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent police

authorities are not registered the complaint against the unofficial

respondents and not provided protection. However, the

explanation offered by the respondent police authorities are

indicating that the representation of the petitioner has been

considered and by using discretion, the crime has not been

registered. In that view, the contention as to the respondent

police authorities in action is unfounded. However, if the

petitioner is still aggrieved by the non registration of crime, he

should have availed statutory remedies available under the Code

of Criminal Procedure/Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha. It

is now well settled that without exhausting the efficacious

alternative remedies available under Cr.P.C/BNSS and in the

absence of exceptional circumstances seeking a direction for

registration of crime under Article 226 of Constitution of India, is

not maintainable and this view has been fortified by the three

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Subramaniam vs.

S. Janaki & Others (AIR 2020 SC 387).

7. In view of this legal position and in the absence of any

exceptional circumstances, this writ petition stands not

maintainable, however, reserving the rights of the petitioner to

avail appropriate remedies available under law before the

Magistrate concerned, this petition is disposed of. There shall be

no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 12.11.2025 mmr

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No.21165 OF 2018

Dated: 12.11.2025

mmr