09. 09. 22.09.2026 (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. 23116 OF 2026 SANDIP KUMAR DEY AND ANOTHER VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS …………… Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, Adv. Mr. Subha Pathak, Adv. …For Petitioners Ms. Reshmi Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Suraj Mishra, Adv. Mr. Yuvraj Chatterjee, Adv. …For State Ms. Amee Rana, Adv. (Via VC) Ms. Nitya Nath, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dey, Adv. …For META INC 1. By presenting this writ petition petitioners have prayed for direction upon concerned police authority to take necessary steps while investigating Serampore Police Station Case No.481/2026 dated 24th August, 2026. 2. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that taking note of gravity of the alleged offence as complained of by lodging complaint, which is at pages 71 & 72 of the writ petition, concerned police authorities are required to fasten rigorous sections while investigating aforesaid case. 3. State respondents and respondent no.6 are represented by learned advocates. 4. It is submitted on behalf of State respondents that after complaint is lodged FIR was registered and investigation is going on. Prayer for taking necessary steps while investigating criminal prosecution by incorporation of rigorous sections can well be presented before the jurisdictional Magistrate in view of law laid [2] down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others) reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409. 5. In paragraph 24 of Sakiri Vasu (supra) it was held that although Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is briefly worded, there is an implied power in the Magistrate under Section 156(3) to order registration of a criminal offence and/ or to direct the Officer-in-Charge of the police station concerned to hold a proper investigation and take all such necessary steps that may be necessary for ensuring a proper investigation including monitoring the same. It was further held in paragraph 24 that even though these powers have not been expressly mentioned in Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Hon’ble Supreme Court was of the opinion that they are implied in the above provision. 1. In view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu (supra) High Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not the appropriate forum for seeking direction upon police authority to take necessary steps including incorporation of rigorous sections; petitioners need to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C./ Section 175(3) BNSS. 2. In view of availability of alternative remedy, present writ petition is not entertained and same stands dismissed. 3. However, this order shall not preclude petitioners to take steps, in accordance with law. 4. It is made clear if jurisdictional Magistrate is approached, in that event, decision shall be taken in [3] accordance with law and not being influenced by the order passed on this writ petition. 6. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. (SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)