5r
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI-'
(Special Original Jurisdiction) ^
TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL./
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT V.
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 18764 OF 2017
Between:
M.Gangadhar. S/o. M.Dastagiri, aged 25
yrs., r/o. H.No. 18-178-34,
Kondapeta, Kodumuru Village & Mandal, Kurnool District..^"
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal
Secretary, Horrie
Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.--"
2. The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool District at
Kurnool.
3. The Station House Officer, Yemmiganur Police Station,
Yemmiganur,
Kurnool Dist.'
4. Sri Prasad, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Sub Inspector of
Police, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool
District. ‘ '''
5. Sri Had Prasad, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Sub Inspector
of Police, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District^
6. Mr. Dasaratharamudu, S/o. & Age not known to the
Petitioner,
Constable Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool District.
i
7. Mr. Ravi, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Constable
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
8. Mr. Somasekhar, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Constable,
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
9. Mr. Victor Babu, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Constable ,
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
10. Mr. Raviprakash Reddy, S/o. & Age not known to the
Petitioner,
Constable , Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool District.
11. Mr. Abdul Rahman, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Constable , Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool District
12. Mr. P.Lakshmanna, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
Constable , Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,
the High Court may
be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more
particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not
taking any action in pursuance to the complaint lodged
with the 2nd
^
respondent on 02.05.2017 against the respondents 4
to 12 and their
subordinates which was inspite of lapse of more than
a month, as being
illegal, arbitrary and is in violation of Article 21
of the Constitution of India
and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 herein
to take action on the
complaint dated 02.05^017 forthwith by registering
a case as against the
respondents 4 to 12 and their subordinates.
OF 2Q17(WPMP. NO: 22885 OF 2017}
l.A. NO; 1
under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
Petition
support of the petition, the High Court may be
stated in the affidavit filed in
2 & 3 herein to take action in pursuance to
pleased to direct the respondents
02.05.2017 by registering a
the complaint lodged by the petitioner on
subordinates
criminal case against the respondents 4 to 12 and their
; SRI. J U M V PRASAD ^ ^
Counsel for the Petitioner
Respondents R1 to R3 : GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the
R4 to R12 : NONE APPEARED
Counsel for the Respondents
The Court made the following Order.
y
APHC010405642017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
[3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 18764 OF 2017
Between:
M.Gangadhar.
...PETITIONER
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.J U MV PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:-
Heard Ms. K.V.Ramani
learned counsel, representing Mr.
J.U.M.V.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents/
police.
2. The petitioner herein is questioning the inaction
on the part of the
respondents/ police in not registering the crime against
the respondents 4 to
12, basing on the complaint submitted by the petitioner
dated 02.05.2017 as
illegal and arbitrary.
Government Pleader, Home for the
learned Assistant
3. Per contra
of this Court passed in
respondents/ police, while relying on the decisions
.8384 of 2020 & batch and also a
of 2020 & batch, W.P. No.
W.P.No.14324
W.A.No.104 of 2022,
Bench this Court passed in
decision of a Division
held that the writ petitions, in view
submits that, in the above judgments it was
not maintainable
and alternative remedy, were
of the availability of efficacious
remedy, if he is so advised.
to avail the alternative
and directed the petitioner
Pleader prayed to dismiss the writ
Therefore, learned Assistant Government
avail the alternative remedy.
a direction to the petitioner to
petition and issue
, wherein
of -Lalita Kumar/ V. State of Uttar Pradesh
4. In a case
the concerned police to register
Court held that a duty is caste upon
the Apex
discloses the commission of a
FIR and investigate the same, if the complaint
the respondent police
exhibited by
offence. The truancy
cognizable
seek writ jurisdiction of this Court.
necessitated them to
res Integra and the same
this regard is no more
5. The legal position
in
of the Apex
authoritative pronouncements
well settled as per the
has been
is well settled law that when police
this High Court. Now it is
Court as well as
individual
the report lodged by any
the F.l.R- based on
failed to register
not by way of
cognizable offence, his remedy is
disclosing commission of a
under Article 226 of the Constitution of india, but he has to
filing a writ petition
him under Section 154(3)
remedies which are available to
exhaust the other
190 r/w.Sec.200 of Cr.P.C.
156(3) and Section
MANU/SC/0157/'
A1R2012 SC 1515 +
i
6. Considering the earlier judgments of the Apex Court rendered on the
same issue, this Court in a batch of writ petitions, disposed of on 30.07.2020
in W.P.No.8384 of 2020 and batch, held that when police failed to register
F.I.R. based on the report lodged with them, which discloses commission of a
cognizable offence, the remedy of the aggrieved person is not by way of a writ
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but only by way of exhausting
the other remedies contemplated under Cr.P.C. i.e. under Section 154(3),
156(3) and Section 190 r/w.Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. and held that the writ petition
seeking such direction to the police to register the F.I.R. is not maintainable.
7. In the aforesaid judgment, this Court has also clearly explained the
Kumari’s case (supra-1) and
distinction between the ratio laid down in Lalitha
the cases of like nature and clearly held that the writ petition is not
maintainable.
8. Following the decision cited supra, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the alternative remedy provided in
Cr.P.C., if he are so advised. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
SD/- Wl.PRABHAKARA RAO
assistantREGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
/
SECTION OFFICER
To
1. The Principal Secretary, Home Dep'artment, State of Andhra Pradesh,
Secretariat Buildings, Amaravati.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool District at Kurnool.
3. The Station House Officer, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur,
Kurnool Dist.
Sri Prasad, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Sub Inspector of
4.
Police, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Sri Hah Prasad, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Sub Inspector
5.
of Police, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Dasaratharamudu, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner
6.
Constable, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Ravi, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Constable
7.
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Somasekhar, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Constable ,
8.
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Victor Babu, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner, Constable,
9.
Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Raviprakash Reddy, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
10.
Constable , Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
Mr. Abdul Rahman, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
11.
Constable, Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District,
12. Mr. P.Lakshmanna, S/o. & Age not known to the Petitioner,
i
Constable , Yemmiganur Police Station, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District.
13. One CC to SRI. J U M V PRASAD Advocate [OPUC]
14. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME (AP), High Court Of Andhra
Pradesh. [OUT]
15. Three CD Copies
DPBR
HIGH COURT
DATED:30/04/2024
ORDER
WP.No.18764 of 2017
.fr?
•©
11 DFr. nn
69i
DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS