Dismissed

Smt. Ahmedi Begum, v. The State of Telangana, Home Department

Telangana HC10 Sept 2025WP/14169/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a mandamus directing police to register a case and investigate on her representation. Citing Supreme Court precedent that such matters must be pursued through statutory remedies under the criminal procedure code before a Magistrate, this court held the writ petition was not entertainable absent exceptional circumstances and dismissed it without costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Ahmedi Begum, Vs The State of Telangana, Home… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[3217 |

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

TI'IE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1 4169 0F 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Ahmedi Begum, W/o. Late Mahmod Ahmed Ouadri Aoed about 55 vrs occ.Housewife, R/o. Plot No.10, G.S Colony, puppabuAi. Narsingi, i.R. District

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State. of .Telangana, Home Department, Rep. by its principal Secretary Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Station House Officer, Narsingi Police Station, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the constitutron of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewilh, the Hrgh court may be pleased to lssue writ, order or Direction more particularry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the acts of Respondent No.2 in not registering the case and not tdking. any action on the petitioners representation dated 13-04-2016 as arbitrary, illegal and, unconstitutional and further direct the respondent No.2 to register the case, and to complete the process of investigation and file charge sheet within the time frame as may be fixed by this Honble Court.

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 201 6(WPMP. NO: 17669 OF 2016)

¶16

Petition under section 151 cPC praying that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to initiate necessary action on the petitioner's representation dated 13{4-2016 pending the disposal of the Writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI H.SUDHAKARA RAO

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.LAXMIKANTH REDI)^{f, AGPFOR HOME}

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JI'STICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶22

WRIT PEtrITION No.14169 OF 2016

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This Writ Petition is frled under Article 226 of C-orstitution of India seeking the following relief/sr

¶25

'... to issue Vrit Order or Direction more panicularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus &claring the acts of Respondent No 2 in not regttering the case and not taking any action on the Petitioners representation d^ted 73042016 as arbitraly illegal and Unconstitutional and funher direct t}re respondent No 2 to register the case and to complete the process of investigation and file charge sheet within the dme frame as may be fixed by this Ftronble C-oun and pass..... ."

¶26

Flearrd Mr.HSudhakar Rao, leamed counsel for the petitioner

¶27

and Mr.Rlaxmikanth Reddy, leamed Assistant Govemment

¶28

Pleader for Home appeariry for respondent Nos.l and 2.

¶29

l. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the representation dated 13.04.2016, rhe police failed to register a Gime/FIR C-onsequently, counsel pra]G for the issuance of an appropriate direction to the Superintendent of Police or the officer concemed to ensure registration of the case.

¶30

4- karned fusistant Govemment Pleader for Home submits

¶31

that filing of writ petition seeking a direction to register a case,^is not maintainable as per the settled legal position.

¶32

¶33

I have perused the materials on record-

¶34

The essence of the peritionerrs grievance is that the concemed police authorities failed to register a car,, based on his repfesenration dated 13.04.2016. ConsequentlS the J etitioner seels a direction from this court under Article 226 of the r bnstitution of India to compel the police to register a crime.

¶35

In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme C_oun ir Sakii Vasu u. State 0f U.P. dz Otherc, AIR 2008 SC 9OZ, has Iaid c< wn *rat a writ petition under Anicle 226 is orrdinarily not maintau able when the grievance pertains to the non-registration of an FII! inasmuch as the Code of Criminal Procedure (C-Pq provides :u r adequare and efficacious remcdy. Following this principle, r ris Courr, in Couind Ralu Sani u. .ltate of Telangana,2019 SCC Orline TS 3491, reiterated that a petitioner must exhaust the star rtory remedies available under the C"r.P.C (now replaced by the Bh ratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, wherever applicablQ bef.: invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High C_ourt.

¶36

This legal position has been funher n.r rforced by a 1$ee-iudge^{Bench ofthe Hon'bleSupre} r,e^C-ourt , iu-

¶37

¶38

M. Subramaniam a. S. Janaki dz Others, AIR^{2020 SC 387, wherein it} was clarified that the appropriate remedy in^{srch casesrs to} approach the Magistrate under the^{procedure contemplatedi" la*,} rather than direcdy invoking the writ^{jurisdiction.}

¶39

In view of the senled legal position, the^{relief sought by the} petitioner under Article 226 of the Clnstitution^{of India cannot be} entertained, panicularly in the^absence of^{any exceptional or} extraordinary circumstances^{demonstratedin the writ petition. The} scheme of law provides^{adequateand efficaciots remedies before} the competent Magistrate,^{which the petitioneris at liberryto} pursue in accordance with law, should^{the cause of action still} subsist.

¶40