165 Ranajit (AR.CT) 19.08.2026 Ct.05 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 13490 OF 2026 Soumen Maity -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Arindam Sen, Mr. Ruksar Parveen, Mr. Biswajit Chakraborty ….for the petitioner. Mr. Debabrata Ray, Mr. Bibekananda Tripathy, Ms. Srabani Mukhopadhyay ….for the respondent nos.5 to 7. Mr. Suryaneel Das, Ms. Suchitra Sinha Chatterjee, Ms. Sumita Sarkar ….for the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. Learned advocate representing petitioner prays for direction upon the concerned police authorities to register FIR based on complaint lodged. It is also alleged that water body is filled up by private respondents which prompted petitioner to lodge complaint before the concerned police authorities. 3. Respondent nos.5 to 7 and State respondents are represented by learned advocates. 4. There is an alternative remedy available to petitioner under Section 175(3) of BNSS, 2023 by approaching jurisdictional Magistrate, in the event complaint of petitioner is not transformed into an FIR. 5. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, reported in (2007) 6 SCC 171 (Aleque Padamsee & Ors. –vs. Union of India & Ors.). 6. In view of availability of alternative remedy to petitioner, writ petition is not entertained and same stands dismissed. . 7. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate in pursuit of remedy. 8. Since no affidavits are called for allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted. 9. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) 2