Writ Petition Directing Police To Register FIR Not Maintainable When Alternative Remedy Is Available: Madhya Pradesh High Court Reiterates
In a recent order by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, Justice G.S. Ahluwalia has reiterated that writ petitions for directing police to register FIRs cannot be entertained by High Courts when an alternative remedy is available.The petitioner contended that they had approached the police to register an FIR, but no action was taken. The writ petition specifically requested the court...
In a recent order by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, Justice G.S. Ahluwalia has reiterated that writ petitions for directing police to register FIRs cannot be entertained by High Courts when an alternative remedy is available.
The petitioner contended that they had approached the police to register an FIR, but no action was taken. The writ petition specifically requested the court to direct the police to consider the complaint and take necessary action.
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's application/complaint, in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of U.P.
Counsel for the State argued that a writ petition for the registration of an FIR is not maintainable. Instead, the petitioner has an alternative remedy available under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), now Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS"). This provision allows the petitioner to approach the Trial Magistrate directly.
Justice Ahluwalia considered the submissions and the contentions raised in the writ petition. The primary question before the court was whether a writ petition could be filed to direct the police to register an FIR.
Several Supreme Court rulings were referenced to guide the decision. In Aleque Padamsee and Others vs. Union of India & Ors. (2007) 6 SCC 17, the Supreme Court stated that while the police must register an FIR upon receiving information about a cognizable offense, the appropriate remedy for inaction by the police is to file a complaint before the Magistrate under Sections 190 and 200 of the Cr.P.C.
In Divine Retreat Centre vs. State of Kerala & Others (2008) 3 SCC 542, the Supreme Court reiterated that the High Court could issue directions under Article 226 of the Constitution if convinced of mala fide actions by the investigating officer, but such cases are rare. Generally, the remedy lies under Sections 190 and 200 Cr.P.C.
A Division Bench of the High Court in Shweta Bhadauria vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (2016) had reaffirmed that writ petitions to compel police to register FIRs are not maintainable unless exceptional circumstances, as outlined in the Supreme Court decision Whirlpool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 8 SCC 1, are present.
Thus, Justice Ahluwalia dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to approach the Magistrate under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C./Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grievance redressal.
The court highlighted that the settled legal position does not support entertaining writ petitions for directing police to register FIRs when an alternative remedy is available.
Case: Ramsingh Thakur Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others
Case No: W.P. No.18731/2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 143