1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 958 OF 2010 Milind Manohar Deshpande & ors. ..PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Mah. & anr. ..RESPONDENTS Mr H.M. Salve, Advocate for the petitioners; Mr N.R. Shaikh, A.P.P. for the respondents. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 28th October, 2010 PER COURT : This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take cognizance of the report dated 21.9.2010 and to take action in accordance with law. 2. We had requested the learned A.P.P. to seek instructions as to what action has been initiated, i.e. whether offence has been registered. The learned A.P.P. states that pursuant to the complaint dated 28.4.2010 an offence vide Crime No.157/2010 has been registered under 2 sections 143, 147, 149, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Out of the seven accused, five accused have been arrested and two are absconding. In respect of the complaint of the petitioners dated 21.9.2010, about which the present petition is filed, the learned A.P.P. states that the aforesaid complaint was received on 22.9.2010 and accordingly preventive action under section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been initiated. 3. Mr Salve, learned Counsel for the petitioners has urged that a writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents directing them to register an offence on the basis of the complaint of the petitioners, dated 21.9.2010. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners on account of such incidence the entire atmosphere in the educational institution is spoiled and it has become virtually impossible for the day- to-day functioning of the educational institution. 4. At this juncture it would be useful to make a reference to the judgments of Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee vs. Union of India, (2007) 6 SCC 171 and Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P., AIR 2008 Supreme Court 907. The Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgments has held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued directing the respondents to register offence. If on the basis of the report lodged by a party an offence is not registered, the party therein has an alternate remedy of filing of private complaint. In the light of the aforesaid judgments, we are not 3 inclined to interfere in this petition and the petition is, therefore, summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. ( A.V. POTDAR, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) amj/criwp958.10