Dismissed¶25

Zarina Khatoom v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Jul 2025W.P.(Cr.)/459/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi (neutral citation 2025:JHHC:19373); W.P.(Criminal) No.459 of 2025, decided 16.07.2025 by Ananda Sen, J. Writ petition seeking mandamus for registration of F.I.R., cognizance and fair investigation against former Officer-in-Charge of Jainagar Police Station (respondent No.6, Abdulla Khan) dismissed at threshold on the ground of alternative statutory remedy under Section 175(3) BNSS; Article 226 jurisdiction declined; liberty granted to invoke the statutory remedy. Keywords: alternative remedy, F.I.R. registration, Section 175(3) BNSS, mandamus, fair investigation, Article 226.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioners, if so advised, to approach the Court by invoking the statutory provision (Section 175(3) of the BNSS); no substantive relief granted. ¶25

Zarina Khatoom Vs the State of Jharkhand — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2025)

¶1

2025:JHHC:19373

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Criminal) No.459 of 2025

¶3

Zarina Khatoon, W/o Mashkoor Khan

¶4

Sahada Khatoon, W/o Margub Khan

¶5

Tarrannum Begum, W/o Mahaboob Allam

¶6

Reshma Khatoon, W/o Mansub Allam

¶7

… … Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Jharkhand.

¶10

The Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Police Headquarter, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶11

The Superintendent of Police, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. Koderma, District Koderma.

¶12

The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. Koderma, District Koderma.

¶13

The Officer-In-Charge, Jainagar Police Station, P.O. & P.S. Jainagar, District Koderma.

¶14

Abdulla Khan, the then Officer in charge, Jainagar Police Station, Jainagar, P.O. & P.S. Jainagar, District Koderma, presently retired from the post of Officer-in-charge, Jainagar.

¶15

… … Respondents

¶16

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶17

For the petitioner : Mr. Kumar Amit, Advocate. For the Respondents : AC to AAG-V

¶18

06/ 16.07.2025

¶19

The petitioners in this Criminal Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for mandamus upon the respondent to act upon their representation for taking cognizance against respondent No.6 and also file an F.I.R. against him. They also prayed for fair investigation after registration of the F.I.R.

¶20

2. There is a specific provision in BNSS in respect of registering an F.I.R. Section 175(3) of the BNSS is the appropriate provision under the BNSS, which the petitioners should invoke. Without invoking the aforesaid provision, the petitioners have rushed to this Court by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶21

¶22

2025:JHHC:19373

¶23

3. Since there is alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioners, I am not inclined to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

¶24

4. With the aforesaid observation, this Criminal Writ Petition stands dismissed .

¶25

5. However, the petitioners if so advised, may approach the Court by invoking the said statutory provision.

¶26

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶27

Prashant.Cp-3

¶28

Zarina Khatoom v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zarina Khatoom v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanoka Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bihar Bengal Bus Owners Assiciation through Its President Niraj Kumar Dinkar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Home Secretary

Md. Safikul Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mr Francis Xavier Bara Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kamlesh Kumar Das Alias Kamlesh Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Madan Das Vs the State of Jharkhand