THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31394 OF 2011 ORDER: Failure on the part of the respondents to register the complaints given by the petitioner on 12.11.2011 and 13.11.2011, and in not investigating there into, is questioned in this Writ Petition by the petitioner, a small-scale industry, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Sri L.J. Veera Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the acts of violence had resulted in destruction of property, grievous hurt and theft of Rs.1,25,000/-; the petitioner had given a complaint on 12.11.2011; no action has taken place till date; and there were repeated acts on 13.11.2011. 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 an offence, but also to direct the officer incharge of the concerned police station to hold proper investigation and, if need be, to monitor the investigation, if any, carried on. 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 November 29, 2011 Note: Issue C.C. by 03.12.2011 B/O.MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31394 OF 2011 November 29, 2011 MD [1] (2008) 2 SCC 409