06. 06. 14.07.2026 (D/L) (D/L) CT. NO. 05 CT. NO. 05 (ARPAN-A.R.CT.) In The High Court at Calcutta CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. 14856 OF 2026 AMITAVA DE BHOWMICK VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS …………… Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sofiya Nasar, Adv. Mr. Santanu Sett, Adv. …For the Petitioner Mr. Partha Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Ghanshyam Pandey, Adv. …For the State Ms. Sreyashee Biswas, Adv. Ms. Manisha Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Tamoha Manna, Adv. …For the Respondent Nos.7 & 8 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. Having considered the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, it is found that there is an allegation made by the petitioner against the private respondents that petitioner is finding it difficult to raise construction pursuant to development agreement. 3. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that a complaint was lodged with the local police station but there is in-action on the part of the concerned police authority. 4. Learned advocates representing State respondents and respondent nos.7 & 8 have jointly submitted that there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner in the event there is in-action on the part of the concerned police authority in lodging criminal prosecution. 2 5. Having considered the respective submissions made on behalf of the parties, it appears that alleged in- action on the part of the concerned police authority prompted the petitioner to approach this Court with the present writ petition. 6. If petitioner is aggrieved by in-action on the part of the concerned police authority, in that event, petitioner is required to take steps in terms of Section 173(4) BNSS, 2023. 7. There is also further remedy available under Section 175(3) of BNSS, 2023 by approaching the jurisdictional Magistrate. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar and another vs. State of Maharashtra and others). 8. In view of availability of alternative remedy, writ petition is not entertained and same stands dismissed. 9. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate in pursuit of remedy. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)