New Delhi, May 4 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday said high courts cannot direct State authorities to register an FIR, without the petitioner exhausting the statutory alternatives provided in law.
The top court said high courts are not bound to entertain a writ petition merely because a case of alleged inaction or negligence has been made out against a statutory authority.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih said while the jurisdiction of the high courts under Article 226 of the Constitution is wide, such jurisdiction is extraordinary, discretionary and subject to certain self-imposed restrictions.
Article 226 refers to the high courts’ power to issue certain writs.
“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 warrants otherwise,” the bench said.
The apex court said the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, provides a structured sequential mechanism for initiating criminal prosecution.
“The statutory framework contemplates that information relating to the commission of a cognisable 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,” the bench said.
The judgment came on a plea challenging a Bombay High Court order that had directed the registration of an FIR against certain individuals in a criminal case.
While setting aside the high court order, the top court said the complainant company has not exhausted the sequential statutory remedies available under the 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,” the bench said. PTI PKS RC
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.