11. Reverting to the facts of the present case in light of principles of law laid down in aforementioned judgments, it is the case of the petitioner that the complaint discloses the commission of cognizable offence, whereas it is the case of the State/respondent that petitioner has alternative remedies under Sections 156(3) & 200 of CrPC, as such, FIR cannot be registered and, therefore, in this fact-situation, in our considered opinion, the remedy of the petitioner, if any, is to avail the remedy available to her under Sections 156(3) or 200 of CrPC, as such, no direction, as prayed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition, can be issued to register FIR in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Similarly, in a writ petition filed for issuance of writ/mandamus for registration of FIR no direction can be issued for considering the complaint filed by the petitioner on administrative side of this Court. Therefore, said relief sought by the petitioner is liable to be and is hereby rejected. However, petitioner is liberty to pursue his complaint, if so advised.
