21 Ranajit (AR.CT) 02.09.2026 Ct.05 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 21689 OF 2026 Abu Taleb Mandal -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Debdip Adhikari ….for the petitioner. Mr. Rachit Lakhmani, Mr. Vaibhav Prakash ….for the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record. 2. On hearing learned advocate representing petitioner, it appears that petitioner is dissatisfied with steps taken by concerned police authorities in investigating criminal prosecution which was initiated based on FIR being Baduria Police Station FIR No.413 of 2025 dated 2nd August, 2025. Petitioner has prayed for direction upon police authorities to arrest accused persons. 3. Learned advocate representing State respondents opposes this writ petition and submits that a suit is pending before the civil court. According to State respondents investigation is going on in accordance with law. 4. Having considered case made out in this writ petition, it appears that petitioner is dissatisfied with manner of investigation being carried out by police authorities. 5. If petitioner is dissatisfied with investigation, in that event petitioner needs to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS, 2023. 6. Writ Court is not appropriate forum to consider present case made out in this writ petition. 7. 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 & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.). 8. In view of availability of alternative remedy to petitioner, 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. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) 2