THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.22949 OF 2011 ORDER: The action of the respondents 1 to 4, in not registering the complaint filed by the petitioner on 04.07.2011, and in not taking any action against respondents 5 to 10, is under challenge in this Writ Petition. A consequential direction is sought to respondents 1 to 4 to register a case and take action against respondents 5 to 10. As held by the Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others[1], the petitioner has an effective remedy under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), whereunder the Magistrate concerned has not only the power to order registration of the offence, but also to direct the officer incharge of the concerned police station to hold proper investigation, and also to monitor the same. In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner, I consider it wholly inappropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J August 16, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.22949 OF 2011 August 16, 2011 MD [1] (2008) 2 SCC 409