1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No. 75/2011 Fulpushpa d/o Shankar Khobragade vs. State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Kuhi and others. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. Mr. V.D. Dongre, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. T.A.Mirza, APP for respondents. CORAM : MRS. V.K.TAHILRAMANI & P.B.VARALE, JJ DATE : 8.3.2011 The case of the petitioner is that her son, father, and mother have committed offences under sections 308, 324, 355, 387, 426, 447 and 506(b) and son, father, mother and 2 neighours have committed offences under sections 327, 341, 447 and 403 of the Indian Penal Code. The grievance of the petitioner is that though she has approached the Police Station the police are not registering a F.I.R.. It is clear that there are some disputes between the petitioner and her family members and neighbours in relation to property and various complaints have been made by her to the Police Station arising out of these disputes.. 2` The learned APP states that on 25.2.2011 the petitioner approached the Police Station and the FIR came to be registered on 25.2.2011. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the FIR has been registered only under minor sections of Indian Penal Code and the F.I.R. ought to have been registered under the sections quoted above. He has further stated that there are some prior incidents, in relation to which she has made complaints to the Police Station but no FIRs are registered. The Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee and others vs. Union of India (2007) 6 SCC 171 held that if information is given to the police regarding commission of cognizable offence and no action is taken by the police then proper remedy is to file a complaint before the concerned Magistrate. The Supreme Court disposed of the Writ Petition with the following direction. “If any person is aggrieved by the inaction of the police officials in registering the FIR, the modalities contained in Section 198 read with Section 200 of Cr.P.C. are to be adopted and observed.” In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, 3` no case is made out for entertaining this petition. Hence, it is rejected. Criminal Application (APPW) No. 17/2011 in Cri. W.P. No. 75/2011 (Fulpushpa d/o Shankar Khobragade vs. State of Maharashtra and others) In view of the rejection of the petition, this application does not survive and thus rejected. JUDGE JUDGE patle