THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.32598 OF 2011 ORDER: Failure on the part of respondent Nos.1 to 3, in taking action against respondent Nos.4 to 7 based on the petitioner’s complaint dated 01.12.2011, is questioned in this Writ Petition as being illegal and arbitrary. It is the petitioner’s case that respondent Nos.4 to 7, from whom his younger son has allegedly borrowed money, had come over to his house, and had abused him though he had no connection whatsoever with his younger son. It is his grievance that, inspite of a complaint being filed, no action was taken by the respondent police officials. As held by the Supreme Court, in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others[1], the petitioner has an effective remedy under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), whereunder the Magistrate concerned has not only the power to order registration of an offence, but also to direct the officer incharge of the concerned police station to hold proper investigation and, if need be, to monitor the investigation, if any, being carried on. In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner, I consider it wholly inappropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J December 20, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.32598 OF 2011 December 20, 2011 MD [1] (2008) 2 SCC 409