Ashish Kumar @ Dr. Ashish Kumar Dixit v. the State of U.P. Thru. the Chief Secy./Home Secy. or Deputy Secy. Lko. and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Keywords: writ of mandamus; registration of F.I.R.; Section 154 Cr.P.C.; Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.; Sections 154(3), 156(3), 190 and 200 Cr.P.C.; Cr.P.C./B.N.S.S.; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; maintainability; alternative remedy; IGRS complaints; CBI investigation; CBCID; CCTV footage; Bijnor Thana; Waseem Haider Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020 / 2021 ADJ 86; Lalita Kumari (2014) 2 SCC 1; Whirlpool Corporation (1998) 8 SCC 1; petition dismissed. Relevant to advocates assessing writ petitions under Article 226 seeking mandamus to compel police to register an F.I.R.: this Bench held such a petition misconceived where the complainant never approached the concerned police or the learned Magistrate under Cr.P.C./B.N.S.S., following the Division Bench rationale in Waseem Haider.
What did the court decide?
This Court held that the petition for writ of mandamus is not maintainable and no direction as prayed for can be issued merely because the petitioner is of the view that the enquiries on his representations were influenced by some person, since despite repeated calls the petitioner failed to indicate any complaint made to the concerned police for lodging of an F.I.R. or to the competent court of the learned Magistrate under Cr.P.C./B.N.S.S.