1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 231 OF 2011 (Sangita B. Dongre vs. State of Maharashtra) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S.A. Bramhe, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri D.B. Yengal , APP for the respondent. CORAM : V.K.TAHILRAMANI & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. APRIL 01, 2011. Heard Shri Bramhe, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Yengal, learned APP for the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had a Bank account in the Bank at Chimur. Her case is that her cheque book was lost in which there were 4-5 cheque leaves signed by the petitioner. The petitioner came to know that one of the cheques containing her signature had come for clearance in the SBI at Chimur. The name of the person written on the cheque was Chetan Vikas Kamdi, hence, she went to the Police Station to lodge FIR. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Police Station, Chimur, did not register her FIR, hence she has prayed that the FIR be registered. It is an admitted fact that the cheque was in fact not encashed in the Bank as the petitioner had already issued stop payment instructions to the Bank. On the issue involved in the present case that is non registration of FIR, we would like to refer to a decision of 2 Supreme Court in the case of Aleque Padamsee & Ors. vs Union of India & ors. , reported in (2007)6 SCC 171 . In this case, the Supreme Court held that if information is given to the police regarding commission of cognizable offence and no action is taken by the police then the proper remedy is to file a complaint before the concerned Magistrate. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has specifically observed that in such a case a writ petition is not to be entertained as there is a remedy available of filing a complaint before the 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 190 read with Section 200 of the Code are to be adopted and observed.” Thus, in our view the decision in Aleque Padamsee is squarely applicable to the present case. Hence, it would be open to the petitioner to adopt such a remedy. Petition disposed of with above directions. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.