1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 243 OF 2011. Smt. Shilpa w/o Late Shirish Thakare .vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. N.B. Raut, Advocate for petitioner, Mr. T.A. Mirza, A.P.P. for respondent. CORAM : MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATED : JULY 4, 2011. Heard Mr. N.B. Raut, learned Advocate for petitioner and Mr. T.A. Mirza, learned A.P.P. for respondent. 2] The case of the petitioner is that the 7/12 extract of the property situated in Mouje Pawani, Tq. Warud, District Amravati have been forged and the land has been mutated in the name of her brother-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law. Her grievance is that though she has approached the Police Station, the police are refusing to register FIR. Hence, she seeks directions from this Court to the police authorities to register the FIR. 2 3] The Supreme Court in the recent decision in the case of Aleque Padamsee and others .vs. Union of India and others, reported in (2007) 6 SCC 171 has held that if information is given to the police regarding commission of cognizable offence and no action is taken by the police, then proper remedy is to file a complaint before the concerned Magistrate. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has specifically observed that in such a case a writ petition is not to be entertained as there is an efficacious remedy available of filing a complaint before the Magistrate. The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition with the following direction : “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.” 4] In view of the above decision, it would be open to the petitioner to adopt the aforesaid remedy. The petition is disposed of. JUDGE. JUDGE. J.