THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.5101 OF 2010 Dated 05th March, 2010 Between: Maddasani Venkat Reddy …Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police And another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri V.Shanti Bhushan Rao For Mrs S.nanda Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2 in registering the case in pursuance of complaint of the petitioner dated 14.02.2010 as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to respondent No.2 to register a case. I have heard Sri V.Shanti Bhushan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. The petitioner alleged that on a dispute over an immovable property, persons by name Chinnapullareddy, Ramanareddy, Venkateswara Reddy, Rajasekhara Reddy, who are the sons of Challa Akkireddy, damaged the cotton crop raised by him by sprinkling some chemical and that on 14.02.2010 at 7.00 a.m, he was also attacked by the said persons. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he made a complaint on 14.02.2010 before respondent No.2, no action has been taken. The petitioner further alleged that when the above mentioned persons harassed the petitioner’s grandmother, she filed a complaint before respondent No.2 and as the latter has not taken action, she filed a private complaint before the Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla and that when no action has been taken on the said private complaint, this Court interfered in W.P.No.535 of 2010 and issued proper directions. In my opinion, this writ petition is misconceived, because if the complainant feels aggrieved by refusal on the part of an Officer-in- charge of a police station to register a crime on the information given by him, the aggrieved party can approach the Superintendent of Police concerned under Section 154(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. If no action is taken by the Superintendent of Police, the aggrieved party can approach the jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing a private complaint (Aleque Padamsee and others v. Union of India and others[1] and Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P[2]). Indeed even according to the petitioner, his grandmother has earlier followed the above mentioned procedure by filing a private complaint. This being so, I do not find any reason for the petitioner to straightaway approach this Court by way of this writ petition instead of availing the above mentioned remedies. For the above mentioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP No.6575 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 5th March, 2010 vrn [1] (2007) 6 SCC 171 [2] AIR 2008 SC 907