IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.23463 OF 2007 Between: Amudala Nagamma. … Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Police, Krishna District and two others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.Ramu Counsel for the respondents: --- This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in registering a criminal case on complaint dated 29-3-2007 filed by the petitioner, as illegal. Heard Sri V.Ramu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home; and perused the record. The petitioner alleged that on 18-3-2007 while she was working in her field, her step son-Amudala Narasaiah came along with his wife-Smt.Narasamma and his second daughter-Savitri and tried to evict her from her fields by using force and filthy language. She also alleged that the wife of one Laxmayya caught hold of her hair and dragged her from the fields. She further alleged that she fell unconscious and ill; she was admitted in the Government Hospital on 18-3-2007 for treatment, where she remained as an inpatient upto 28- 3-2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that though she lodged a complaint on 29-3-2007, after her discharge from the Hospital, respondent No.3 refused to receive the same. If respondent No.3 has not taken any action against the complaint of the petitioner, she has an effective remedy under Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C., as held by the Supreme Court in ALEQUE PADAMSEE1) – (2007) 6 SCC 171, wherein it was held thus: “ 7. Whenever any information is received by the police about the alleged commission of offence which is a cognizable one there is a duty to register the FIR. There can be no dispute on that score. The only question is whether a writ can be issued to the police authorities to register the same. The basic question is as to what course is to be adopted if the police does not do it. As was held in All India Institute of Medical sciences's case (supra) and re-iterated in Gangadhar's case (supra) the remedy available is as set out above by filing a complaint before the Magistrate. Though it was faintly suggested that there was conflict in the views in All India institute of Medical Sciences's case (supra), Gangadhar's case (supra), Hari Singh's case (supra), Minu Kumari's case (supra) and Ramesh Kumari's case (supra), we find that the view expressed in Ramesh Kumari's case (supra) related to the action required to be taken by the police when any cognizable offence is brought to its notice. In Ramesh Kumari's case (supra) the basic issue did not relate to the methodology to be adopted which was expressly dealt with in All India Institute of medical Sciences's case (supra), Gangadhar's case (supra), minu Kumari's case (supra) and Hari Singh's case (supra). The view expressed in Ramesh Kumari's case (supra) was re- iterated in Lallan Chaudhary and Ors. V. State of Bihar (AIR 2006 SC 3376 ). The course available, when the police does not carry out the statutory requirements under Section 154 was directly in issue in All India Institute of Medical Sciences's case (supra), Gangadhar's case (supra), Hari Singh's case (supra) and Minu Kumari's case (supra). The correct position in law, therefore, is that the police officials ought to register the FIR whenever facts brought to its notice show that cognizable offence has been made out. In case the police officials fail to do so, the modalities to be adopted are as set out in Sections 190 read with Section 200 of the Code. It appears that in the present case initially the case was tagged by order dated 24. 2. 2003 with WP (C) 530/2002 and WP (C) 221/2002. Subsequently, these writ petitions were de-linked from the aforesaid writ petitions. 8. The writ petitions are finally disposed of with the following directions: (1) 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. (2) It is open to any person aggrieved by the inaction of the police officials to adopt the remedy in terms of the aforesaid provisions. (3) So far as non-grant of sanction aspect is concerned, it is for the concerned government to deal with the prayer. The concerned government would do well to deal with the matter within three months from the date of receipt of this order. (4) We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. In view of the above authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court, the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate with a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C. ----------------------------------- - C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 21-4-2008 MNR 1) (2007) 6 SCC 171