9 0022..0099..22002266 Ct. No. 05 adeb WPA 21449 of 2026 Ilu Saha Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra Mr. Supriyo Das Mr. Bishal Roy …for the petitioner Mr. Rajdeep Majumder Mr. Mayukh Mukherjee Ms. Sagnika Banerjee …for the State 1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record. 2. By presenting this writ petition learned advocate representing petitioner expresses dissatisfaction regarding manner of investigation and inability of investigating agency to incorporate rigorous sections. According to petitioner it is a case of murder of daughter of petitioner but investigation is being carried on treating the incident as a case of suicide. 3. State respondents are represented by Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, learned Additional Advocate General who submits on instruction that investigation is at the nascent stage and subsequently if it is found that other sections 2 are required to be incorporated for effective investigation in that event necessary steps shall be taken. 4. Having considered the respective submissions made on behalf of parties, this Court finds that there is dissatisfaction with regard to steps taken by the investigating agency in FIR being New Town P.S. Case No. 272 of 2026 dated 27th July, 2026. 5. There is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner under Section 175(3) BNSS, 2023 in the event petitioner is dissatisfied with manner of investigation and if it is found that some rigorous sections are required to be incorporated. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court, one is reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.) and another is reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 (Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.). 6. It has been succinctly decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in aforesaid two judgments that even after registration of FIR, if complainant is dissatisfied with manner of investigation and if it is found that some other steps are required to be taken in that event 3 approach needs to be made before the jurisdictional Magistrate and at the first instance writ court is not appropriate forum. 7. In view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in aforesaid two judgments present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands disposed of thereby granting liberty to the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate in pursuit of remedy, if occasion so arises. 8. Parties to act on server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)