MAHESHBHAI NATVARLAL THAKAR vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 15778 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
MAHESHBHAI NATVARLAL THAKAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NAYAN D PAREKH(5010) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI
Date : 03/11/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The captioned petition is preferred under Article 14, 21, 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:-
A) Admit and allow the present application;
B) Direct the respondents and their agents/servants to
register FiR/complaint of the petitioner dated
01.03.2026 (Annexure - A) disclosing cognizable
offence and investigate the same in accordance with
law and proceed against the real culprits of the
offence alleged;
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
C) During pendency and/or final disposal of the present
petition be pleased to direct the respondents and
their agents or servants to act upon the complaint of
the petitioner dated 01.03.2026 annexed at
Annexure - A to this petition;
D) Declare that the action on the part of the
respondents and their agents/servants refusing to
register FIR of the petitioner is violative of the
mandatory provisions of Chapter - XII of Cr.P.C./
corresponding provisions of BNSS, 2023 as well as
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. State of U.P. reported in
(2014) 2 SCC 1 and hence such action is arbitrary
and unconstitutional.
E) Alternatively be pleased to direct respondent no. 3
and or 4 to look into the matter on account of
neglect and non registration of FIR of petitioner by
the Police Inspector; Maninagar Police Station;
F) Any other and further orders which are deemed just
and proper in the interest of justice.
2. Issue Rule to the respondents, returnable forthwith. Learned APP
accepts and waives service of Rule on behalf of all respondents.
3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
had submitted a detailed written compliant to respondent No.2 - Police
Inspector, Maninagar Police Station, Ahmedabad on 01.03.2026,
thereby disclosing the commission of cognizable offense, however,
despite this fact, FIR was not lodged by respondent No.2. Therefore, by
way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed that appropriate
directions be issued to the respondent authorities for lodging the FIR.
5. Learned APP vehemently contended that the petitioner ought to
have availed alternative remedy available under law, as such, prayed for
rejection of the captioned appeal.
6. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for
the parties and having gone through the records, it emerges from the
records that the petitioner has made a complaint on 01.03.2026 before
respondent No.2, however, on the basis of the said complaint, no FIR
was registered. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred the instant
petition under Article 14, 21, 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India for
lodging the FIR.
7. It is settled proposition of law that in the event if police
authorities have not taken cognizance on the basis of a complaint made
before them and have consequently failed to register an FIR, the
petitioner could have availed alternative remedies available under law
before approaching this Court, especially when the same is available
under BNSS, 2023. Reliance can be placed on the judgment rendered
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs State Of
U.P. and Ors. reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 , wherein the Hon’ble
Apex Court has observed as under:-
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
“25. We have elaborated on the above matter because we often
find that when someone has a grievance that his FIR has not been
registered at the police station and/or a proper investigation is not
being done by the police, he rushes to the High Court to file a writ
petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. We are of the
opinion that the High Court should not encourage this practice
and should ordinarily refuse to interfere in such matters, and
relegate the petitioner to his alternating remedy, firstly under
Section 154(3) and Section 36 Cr.P.C. before the concerned police
officers, and if that is of no avail, by approaching the concerned
Magistrate under Section 156(3).
26. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been
registered by the police station his first remedy is to approach the
Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or other
police officer referred to in Section 36 Cr.P.C. If despite
approaching the Superintendent of Police or the officer referred to
in Section 36 his grievance still persists, then he can approach a
Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. instead of rushing to the
High Court by way of a writ petition or a petition under Section
482 Cr.P.C. Moreover he has a further remedy of filing a criminal
complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Why then should writ
petitions or Section 482 petitions be entertained when there are
so many alternative remedies?
27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very
wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a
proper investigation, and for this purpose he can monitor the
investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly
(though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should
discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. simply because a person has a grievance that
his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being
registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police.
For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154(3)
before the concerned police officers, and if that is of no avail,
under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate or by filing a
criminal complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and not by filing a
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
28. It is true that alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to a
writ petition, but it is equally well settled that if there is an
alternative remedy the High Court should not ordinarily interfere.”
8. Moreover, recently in Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. v. The
State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in 2026 INSC 442 , the
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under:-
“7. Keeping in view the above exposition of law, we find that the
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India ought not to have been invoked when alternative equally
efficacious statutory remedies were available. If a person has a
grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or
having been registered, proper investigation is not being
conducted, then the remedy does not ordinarily lie in invoking the
writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but in seeking recourse to the
statutory framework, unless of course the urgency of the
circumstances warrant otherwise.
8. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (erstwhile Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973) provides a structured sequential
mechanism for initiating criminal prosecution. The statutory
framework contemplates that information relating to the
commission of a cognizable offence is first placed before the
officer-in-charge of the police station and an FIR is registered
under Section 173(1) BNSS. In the event of refusal to register the
FIR, recourse lies before the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police
under Section 173(4) BNSS and, thereafter, before the Magistrate,
under Section 175(3) BNSS.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
11. The High Court is not bound to entertain a writ petition merely
because a case of alleged inaction or negligence is made out
against a statutory authority. Ordinarily, where a statute provides
a complete and efficacious remedy, the same must be exhausted
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/15778/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/11/2026
(GJHC240837382026)
before invoking constitutional jurisdiction [See: Sakiri Vasu (supra)
and Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe (supra)]. In the present facts, the
complainant Company, has not exhausted the sequential statutory
remedies available under BNSS. There is, therefore, no foundation
to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court for the
reason that efficacious and efficient alternative remedies exists.
Hence, at this stage, we find the instant writ petition to be
premature, and, therefore, not fit to be entertained.”
9. Having considered the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the aforesaid judgments, I am of the considered view that the
petitioner ought to have availed other efficacious remedies available
under the law before approaching this Court. Thus, in light of the above
discussion, the present petition, being devoid of any merit, is liable to
be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed . However, the petitioner is
at liberty to avail other efficacious remedies available under the law. It
is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the
case. Rule is discharged accordingly.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
ARUN
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by ARUN B(HC02368) on Sat Nov 07 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Nov 08 01:00:45 IST 2026