HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8787 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard the petitioner appears in person and learned AGA for the State- respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs: "I. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no 1 and 2 for registration of FIR on the complaint dated 08.09.2025 sent through email with attachment.(Annexure no 1) II. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no 1 and 2 to collect the CCTV footage dated 08.09.2025 from inside the office of E.IN.C. Design and planning office pwd head quarter Lucknow." 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an incident took place on 8.9.2025 when the Engineer-in-Chief is said to have assaulted the petitioner in his chamber along with his associates. The petitioner has sent a complaint in this regard through E-mail on 8.9.2025, a copy of the same is annexed as Annexure-2 to the petition but yet the FIR has not been lodged, hence this petition. 4. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of M/s Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Vs. The Excise and Taxation Officer-cum- Assessing Authority and others (Civil Appeal No. 5393 of 2010 decided Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : In Person Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Chandan Pathak .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) on 1.2.2023) to contend that despite the petitioner having a remedy of filing an appropriate application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. yet prays that this Court may direct the respondents to lodge the FIR. 5. No doubt, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Godred Sara Lee Ltd. (Supra) has held that despite existence of all remedies, a writ petition can be entertained: (i) where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights; (ii) where there is violation of principles of natural justice; (iii) where the order or the proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction; or (iv) where the vires of an Act is challenged. 6. The Court is of the view that once the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 as reiterated in M. Subramaniam and another Vs. S. Janaki and another (2020) 16 SCC 728 has categorically held that if a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police or proper investigation is not being done then the remedy to the aggrieved person is not to go the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but to approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 6. Considering the aforesaid, it is thus apparent that the petitioner has a remedy of filing an appropriate application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C (now under relevant provisions of B.N.S.S., 2023). 7. In view of above, writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate. In case, the said application is filed the learned Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law. October 14, 2025 AKK CRLP No. 8787 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench