21 2277..0077..22002266 Ct. No. 05 adeb WPA 15900 of 2026 Anil Mehra Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Ambar Nath Banerji Ms. Leena Panja Mr. Amrita Panja Mallick …for the petitioner Mr. Nanigopal Chakraborty Ms. Renesa Dey …for the State 1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. A case is made out on behalf of the petitioner that though an FIR has been registered and a criminal prosecution has commenced being Karaya Police Station Case No. 72/2025 dated 24th March, 2025 but no steps have been taken by the concerned police authorities by taking forward the investigation to its logical conclusion. Prayer is made in this writ petition directing the police authorities to take expeditious steps to complete investigation. 3. State respondents are represented by learned advocate. 2 4. If petitioner is dissatisfied with inaction on the part of the concerned police authorities in investigating aforesaid case in that event petitioner needs to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS 2023. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.). In paragraph 7 of Sujal Vishwas Attavar (supra) it was held if a person has grievance that 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 writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but in seeking recourse to the statutory framework, unless of course the urgency of circumstances warrant otherwise. Court also relies upon judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 (Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.) which was relied upon by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while delivering judgment in Sujal Vishwas Attavar (supra). 3 5. Therefore, at this stage petitioner needs to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS in the event investigation is not being carried out appropriately. 6. In view of availability of alternative remedy writ petition is not entertained and same stands dismissed. 7. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law, if so advised. 8. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)