Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Patan Fareed Khan, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 12 October, 2020
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
1
CMR, J.
W.P.Nos.18461 & 18476 of 2020
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Writ Petition Nos.18461 and 18476 of 2020
COMMON ORDER:
Both these Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are filed seeking writ of mandamus to the concerned police to register the report lodged by the petitioners as F.I.R. and investigate the case and file final report.
2. Since both these Writ Petitions are filed based on identical facts seeking a similar relief, these Writ Petitions are heard together and they are being disposed of by this Common Order.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the official respondents.
4. The main grievance of the petitioners appears to be that they have lodged reports with the concerned police regarding commission of cognizable offences and the said reports are not registered as F.I.Rs. and the cases are not investigated. Therefore, the petitioners sought a direction to the concerned Police to register the said reports as F.I.Rs. and investigate the cases and file final reports.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that as per the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal1 when a report is 1 1992 AIR 604, 1990 SCR Supl. (3) 259 2 CMR, J.
W.P.Nos.18461 & 18476 of 2020 lodged before the Police regarding commission of a cognizable offence, there is a legal obligation cast on the part of the police to register the report as F.I.R. and investigate the case. As the police did not register the case even though the report discloses commission of a cognizable offence, he would submit that there is inaction on the part of the Police in registering the case and they have abrogated their lawful duty and as such, the only remedy available to the petitioners is to approach this Court invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and seek a direction to the police to register the F.I.R. and investigate the case.
6. Learned Government Pleader for Home would submit that in such a situation when the police failed to register the F.I.R. and investigate the case, the remedy of the petitioners is not by way of filing a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and they got efficacious alternative remedy under Sections 154(3), 156(4), 190 and 200 Cr.P.C. and they have to exhaust the said remedies and as such, the writ petitions are not maintainable.
7. The legal position whether in a given situation when the police failed to register F.I.R. on the basis of the report lodged with them which discloses commission of a cognizable offence is not res integra. As rightly contended by the learned Government Pleader for Home, the remedy of the aggrieved persons is not by way of writ under Article 226 of the 3 CMR, J.
W.P.Nos.18461 & 18476 of 2020 Constitution of India and he has to exhaust various other alternative remedies available to him under Cr.P.C. The legal position in this regard has been well settled. Recently, this Court, after elaborately considering the law on the point with reference to the judgments of the Apex Court, in a batch of Writ Petitions in W.P.No.17905 of 2020 and batch, disposed of on 09.10.2020, held that in such a situation the petitioners have to exhaust their remedies under Section 154(3), 156(4), 190 and 200 Cr.P.C. and the writ petitions are not maintainable. Therefore, in view of the said clear law which is settled in this regard, these Writ Petitions are not maintainable.
8. In the result, both these Writ Petitions are dismissed as not maintainable. No costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall also stand closed.
________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date:12.10.2020.
cs