Petitioner sought a writ directing registration of an FIR alleging cognizable offences. The Court held that a private complaint before the Magistrate is an efficacious alternate remedy and dismissed the PIL.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRPILST. 55-14
VPH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (St.) No. 55 OF 2014
Abdul Hameed Noor Mohammed Shaikh ... Petitioner Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. S. S. Lanke, for the Petitioner. Mr. S. K. Shinde, PP, with K. V. Saste for the Respondent - State. Mr. G. D. Utangale, for Respondent No. 8.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & P. D. KODE, JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 22, 2014
PC.
. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Petitioner is seeking an appropriate writ, order and direction, directing Respondent Nos. 2, 6, 7 to register the FIR, which according to him, discloses commission of cognizable offence. In our view, Petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy of filing a private complaint before the concerned Magistrate. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this petition. PIL is accordingly disposed of reserving right of the Petitioner to file a private complaint before the appropriate Magistrate Court.
Vinayak Halemath
1 / 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a PIL seeking direction to register an FIR when a private complaint is an efficacious alternate remedy.
Abdul Hameed Noor Mohammed Shaikh
State of Maharashtra
V. M. Kanade
P. D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
