IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 12736 of 2025 ========================================================== MONIKA YOGESHBHAI ITALIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MS POONAM M MAHETA(11265) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 18/09/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. By way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 528 of the BNSS, the petitioner has sought for the following prayer: “(A) The Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ of mandamus or writ in nature of mandamus or writ in nature of mandamus or order or direction to quash and set aside the action of the respondents to not complying the statutory provisions of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 and be further pleased to direct Respondent No.3 to initiate appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the respondent police officers, for not performing his duty by registering FIR of the information tendered by the petitioner, in the interest of justice; 2. Having heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the respondent – State of Gujarat and perusing the record, prima facie it appears to this Court that no offence is made out. Essentially, it appears that there is a civil dispute between the partners. So far as other prayer to intiate disciplinary action against police officers is concerned, since there is no any offence registered, question does not arise to consider the said prayer. Even otherwise, the petitioner has straightway approached this p. 2 Court rather than availing appropriate remedy. So f 3. In view of the above, no case is made out to issue any direction in the present petition. Hence, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Superme Court in the case of M. Subramaniam vs. S. Janki reported in (2020)16 SCC 728 as well as the decision in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage & Others reported in (2016)6 SCC 277, no case is made out to exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. In wake of aforesaid discussion, present petition stands disposed of. However, respondent authority to inform the outcome of written complaint dated 02.04.2025 to the petitioner within a period for four weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. It is kept open for the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy if he is dissatisfied with any action on the part of the police authority rather than straightway approaching this Court. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the matter. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay