Bimlesh Upadhayay @ Bimlesh Kumar … vs The State Of Bihar Through Director … on 24 July, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Bimlesh Upadhayay @ Bimlesh Kumar … vs The State Of Bihar Through Director … on 24 July, 2025

Author: Sandeep Kumar

Bench: Sandeep Kumar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.164 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2017 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Bimlesh Upadhayay @ Bimlesh Kumar Upadhayay Son of Janardhan
                 Upadhayay Resident of Village - Gorari, P.O. - Gorari, P.S. - Karakat, District
                 - Rohtas

                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
                 Bihar
           2.    The Deputy Director General of Police, Shahabad, Dehri-on-Sone Bihar
           3.    The Superintendent of Police, Vikaramganj, District - Rohtas at Sasaram
                 Bihar
           4.    The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vikaramganj, District - Rohtas at
                 Sasaram Bihar
           5.    Inspector of Police-Cum-S.H.O. Vikaramganj, District - Rohtas Bihar
           6.    The S.H.O. Kachhawan Police Station, District - Rohtas Bihar

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr.Brij Nandad Prasad
                 For the Respondent/s     :         Mr.G.A.5
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   24-07-2025

Heard the parties.

2. This application has been filed on behalf of the

petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities for

the following relief:-

I. For proper investigation of
Vikramganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2017.

II. For registration of FIR in Kacchawan
Police Station on the application of the petitioner
dated 23.06.2017.

3. So far as prayer no. 1 of the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.164 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2025
2/4

concerned, this application is disposed of with regard to the

same with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned

Court below for redressal of his grievances by way of filing a

petition in his case in light of the Judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P.,

reported as (2008) 2 SCC 409. If such a petition is filed then the

same shall be considered by the Court below in accordance with

law and appropriate orders shall be passed.

4. So far as prayer no. 2 of the petitioner is

concerned, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri

Vasu vs. State of U.P., reported as (2008) 2 SCC 409 has

discouraged the practice of approaching the High Court with a

prayer for registration of an F.I.R. The relevant paragraphs of

the aforesaid decision read as under:-

“27. As we have already observed above,
the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct
registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper
investigation, and for this purpose he can monitor
the investigation to ensure that the investigation is
done properly (though he cannot investigate
himself). The High Court should discourage the
practice of filing a writ petition or petition under
Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code simply
because a person has a grievance that his FIR has
not been registered by the police, or after being
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.164 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2025
3/4

registered, proper investigation has not been done
by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies
under Sections 36 and 154(3) before the concerned
police officers, and if that is of no avail, under
Section 156(3) Criminal Procedure Code before
the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint
under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code and
not by filing a writ petition or a petition under
Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code.

28. It is true that alternative remedy is
not an absolute bar to a writ petition, but it is
equally well settled that if there is an alternative
remedy the High Court should not ordinarily
interfere” (Emphasis supplied)

5. The aforesaid ratio was reiterated by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs.

Hemant Yashwant Dhange reported as (2016) 6 SCC 277 and

in the case of M. Subramaniam vs. S. Janaki reported as

(2020) 16 SCC 728.

6. If the F.I.R is not registered on account of inaction

on the part of the police officials or the actions not to the

satisfaction of the petitioner, then the efficacious alternative

remedy is available to the petitioner under sections 190, 200 of

the Cr.P.C (sections 210, 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023) or other statutory provisions under law.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.164 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2025
4/4

7. Therefore, the petitioner is given liberty to avail

alternative remedies as provided under the Cr.P.C./Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for registration of the

F.I.R.

8. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with the

aforesaid liberty to the petitioner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U