Police Must Consider the Complaint Under Lalita Kumari Principles Within Three Weeks.

The petitioner, the head of Sri Shankarlingeshwar Math, Udachan, sought to quash a notice issued by the Afzalpur Police Station and to compel the police to consider his 6 August 2026 complaint and register an FIR against respondents 7–18.

At the hearing, the Additional Government Advocate stated that the police would withdraw the notice and that the competent police officer would consider the complaint and take an appropriate decision.

1. Whether the challenge to the police notice remained live after the State submitted that it would be withdrawn.

2. Whether the Court should direct the police to consider the petitioner’s complaint and decide whether to take further action, including registration of an FIR.

The Court directed the police to consider the complaint in accordance with law, keeping in mind Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2014) 2 SCC 1.

That precedent governs the police’s duty to act on information disclosing a cognizable offence, including the circumstances in which an FIR must be registered and the limited scope for a preliminary inquiry.

Because the State undertook to withdraw the challenged notice, the Court treated the challenge to it as infructuous.

As to the complaint, the State represented that the police would consider it and take an appropriate decision.

The Court accepted that undertaking and directed respondent No. 5 to decide the complaint within three weeks, in accordance with law and with due regard to Lalita Kumari.

It did not determine whether the complaint disclosed a cognizable offence or direct that an FIR be registered.

The challenge to the notice became infructuous following the State’s undertaking to withdraw it; respondent No. 5 was directed to consider the petitioner’s complaint in accordance with law and take a decision within three weeks of receiving a copy of the order, keeping Lalita Kumari in mind.

The Court did not order registration of an FIR.