Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010263502025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7041/2025 AINUL ISLAM SHAH S/O- LATE ABDUL HAMID SHAH, R/O- VILL.- BORO BAGJHAPA, P.O. HAZIRHAT, P.S. SUKCHAR, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 783128. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007. 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR P.O. HATSINGIMARI DIST. SOUTH SALAMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783135. 4:THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE SOUTH SALMARA POLICE STATION P.O. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783127. 5:IN-CHARGE KHARUBANDA POLICE OUT POST HATSINGIMARI Page No.# 2/3 P.O. HATSINGIMARI DIST SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783135 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R MAJUMDAR, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 10.12.2025 Heard Shri R Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri H Sarma, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam for the respondents. 2. The case projected case is that though an FIR was lodged by the petitioner on 11.11.2025 before the respondent no. 5 against the accused persons, neither any FIR has been registered nor any preliminary investigation done. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioner that no GD Entry has also been recorded and on the other hand, the accused persons are moving freely. The aspect of non-registration of FIR and lack of proper investigation have been dealt with by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a number of cases and there is a mandate that in normal circumstances, a Writ Court should not interfere with such matters as remedy lies in the Code itself. In this regard one may gainfully refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 wherein the following observations have been laid down: “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 Page No.# 3/3 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 CrPC 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 police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC. 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.” 3. Shri Sarma, learned State Counsel has also submitted that the remedies are available in the Code itself wherein the petitioner can file appropriate complaint. 4. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that instead of entertaining the writ petition, the petitioner be given liberty to approach the appropriate authority in terms of the provisions of the Code. 5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations. JUDGE Comparing Assistant