IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTYNINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASUTHOSH MOHUNTHA W.P.No.18053 of 2011 Between: R. Obul Reddy .. Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Police, Chittoor, and 3 others .. Respondents ORDER: The petitioner has prayed for directions to the official respondents to register a case against the 4th respondent, who kept all the records and properties of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Chowdepally village and Mandal, Chittoor District along with the records of fair price shop run by the petitioner society with him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a result of not handing over all the records/properties of the society by the 4th respondent along with the records of fair price shop run by the petitioner society, the petitioner society is causing much inconvenience not only to its day to day affairs of the society but also to the distribution of essential commodities to the card holders of the fair price shop run by the petitioner society for the last two months. Learned Government Pleader for Home submits that if the petitioner has aggrieved with the inaction of the respondents in registering a crime, he has an alternative remedy, firstly under Section 154 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 36 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Government Pleader placed a reliance on Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and others[1], wherein it has been held that in case the police is not registering a complaint or conducting a proper investigation, then the proper course for the aggrieved party is to resort to remedial measures under Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. and Section 36 of the Cr.P.C. before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the concerned Magistrate under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. The relevant portions at paras 25 to 27 are reads thus: “..…..We have elaborated on the above matter because we often find that when someone has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered at the police station and/or a proper investigation is not being done by the police, he rushed to the High Court to file a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not encourage this practice and should ordinarily refuse to interfere in such matters, and relegate the petitioner to his alternating remedy, firstly under Section 154 (3) and Section 36 Cr.P.C. before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the concerned Magistrate under Section 156 (3). If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police station his first remedy is to approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. or other police officer referred to in Section 36 Cr.P.C. If despite approaching the Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to in section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can approach a Magistrate under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover he has a further remedy of filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when they are so many alternative remedies? As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation, and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C……..” In view of the observations made in the precedent cited above, the petitioner is relegated to exhaust all the alternative remedies available to him under the law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________________ ASHUTHOSH MOHUNTHA, J Date: 29-06-2011 Ksn [1] AIR 2008 SC 907