IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30033 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- ANIL KUMAR, S/O. AMMU, RESIDING AT PRIYA NIVAS, KAVINPURAM, VILAPPILSALA.P.O, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. ASST. COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CANTONMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SPECIAL CELL, TRIVANDRUM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUSEUM CIRCLE OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM. 4. MR. UNNIKRISHNA KUMAR, S/O. CHAKKRAPANI, NEYYATNIKARA TALUK, MANJADI JUNCTION, RESIDING AT VASANTHA VIHAR, TRIVANDRUM. R1 to R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 30033 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT The short grievance of the petitioner is that though Exts.P1 and P3 complaints dated 07.01.08 and 12.04.08 were submitted by him to the City Police Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram (who surprisingly has not been arrayed as respondent in this petition) no crime has been registered on the basis of Exts.P1 and P3. Petitioner has hence come to this court with this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. After the decision in Sakri Vasu v. State of U.P.[2008 (1) KLT 724(SC)] which has been followed by this court in John V. State of Kerala [2008(1) KLT 462], it is trite that a person with a grievance like the one raised by the petitioner herein, must exhaust the equally efficacious alternative remedy which he has under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C before the learned Magistrate and only thereafter he has the option ordinarily to approach this Court with petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having not done the same, the petitioner has rushed to this Court with this petition under Article 226. W.P.(C). No. 30033 OF 2008 -:2:- I am unable to perceive any exceptional reasons which can persuade this Court to come to the conclusion that notwithstanding the dictum in the above precedents, this application under Article 226 deserves to be entertained. No exceptional or special reasons are shown to exist. This Writ Petition is in these circumstances dismissed with the specific observation that the option of the petitioner to approach the learned Magistrate as indicated in the above decisions shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this Writ Petition. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb W.P.(C). No. 30033 OF 2008 -:3:- W.P.(C). No. 30033 OF 2008 -:4:-