IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 18577 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt.Goondla Chovitolla Devai D/o.Devanna R/o.Velmal village Nandipet Mandal Nizamabad District 2 Smt.Goondla Chovitolla Shobha D/o.Devidass R/o.H.No.3-63, Velmal village Nandipet Mandal Nizamabad District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Station House officer, Nandipet Police station, Nandipet, Nizamabad District 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad District 3 The Director of General of Police,Lakdikapul Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus: (i). to declare the inaction on the part of the ﬁrst respondent in not registering a case on the basis of the complaint dated 21.7.2008 made by the petitioner and even in accordance with direction issued by the second respondent dated 23.7.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust apart from violative of principles of natural justice and (ii) consequently to direct the respondents to register a case on the basis of petitioner complaint dated 21.7.2008 and take action in accordance with law to investigate the crime ;and pass such other order or orders as this Hon`ble court deems ﬁt proper and appropriate in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Home. 2. The fundamental and singular grievance in this Writ Petition is that the respondents/police have not registered the complaint of the petitioner conveying information as to the commission of a cognizable oﬀence by named individuals in abdication of the statutory responsibility and the non-derogable obligation under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In this behalf the petitioner submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent who is stated to have endorsed to the 1st respondent to enquire and take appropriate action and report within ten days, on 23-07-2008. However non-resonance by the 1st respondent thereafter is the complaint herein. 3. In respect of such a grievance the petitioner is seen to have an eﬀective statutory remedy by way of preferring a private complaint before the judicial Magistrate of First Class and in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in SAKIRI VASU v. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [1], petitioner is required to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate but not this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. For the aforesaid reasons the Writ Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission with a liberty to the petitioner to pursue the available alternative remedy under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 27th August, 2008. Tsy To 1 The Station House officer, Nandipet Police station, Nandipet, Nizamabad District 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad District 3 The Director of General of Police,Lakdikapul Hyderabad 3 2CCs to the GP for Home. 4. 2CD copies [1] AIR 2008 S.C. 907