HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11163 of 2010 Date 23.08.2010 Between: A.Narasimha @ Narsaiah. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District & others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner :Sri T.Koteshwara Prasad Counsel for the Respondents : Assistant Government for Home HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11163 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in acting on the petitioner’s complaints dated 06.12.2005 and 28.04.2010 as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing the respondents. The petitioner alleged that he is the owner of Acs.1½ of land in Sy.Nos.219 and 220 of Alwal Village, that certain persons by name Giri and Akkapalli Pochaiah, beat the petitioner, got the above-mentioned property forcibly registered in their favour without paying money on 16.11.2005 and that the complaint earlier given in this regard was not registered. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 28.04.2010, he has submitted a fresh complaint to the ACP, Alwal, Cyberabad and as no action has been taken thereon, he filed the present Writ Petition. In the counter filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Medchal Police Station, respondent No.2, it is inter alia stated that the complaint given by the petitioner on 28.04.2010 was forwarded to him, that a General Dairy Entry was made on the same day and that as the contents of the complaint disclose existence of a civil dispute, he has advised the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redressal of his grievance. As regards the police protection, respondent No.2 has stated that unless the competent authority grants a direction, no such protection can be given. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the petitioner availed a wrong remedy by filing a Writ Petition in this Court. As held by the Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others[1], if the complaint discloses commission of a cognizable offence and if it is not registered, the aggrieved party is at liberty to approach the District Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. and if no action is taken by him, the aggrieved party can file a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C. As the police have prima facie opined that the complaint does not disclose commission of a cognizable offence, they have not registered the criminal case. If the petitioner feels aggrieved thereby, he is entitled to avail the above-mentioned remedies. Subject to this observation, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the main petition, WPMP.No.14222 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date:23.08.2010 Usd [1] AIR 2008 SC 907