AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
"...to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not filing charge sheet in FIR No.157 of 2025 dated 03.02.2025 within the stipulated period as illegal, improper, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principals of natural justice, consequently direct the 3rd respondent to file charge sheet in FIR No.157 of 2025 forthwith and pass..."
Heard the petitioner party in person, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr. C.Rakee Sridharan, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has produced a copy of the written instructions, wherein it is stated that, on a reference made by the Criminal Court, FIR No.157 of 2025 was registered by respondent No.3 and thereafter, investigation has been completed and it was found that the dispute was 'Civil in Nature' and after obtaining permission, notice was issued to the complainant by registered post on 20.02.2026. Thereafter, a final report was filed before the learned X Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, requesting that the case be treated as “Civil in Nature”, vide Inward No.1247 of 2026, dated 24.03.2026. Thus, the allegation that the respondent police have not filed any report before the jurisdictional Court is denied as false and incorrect.
The petitioner, party-in-person, submits that when he lodged a complaint before the respondent police, they did not register the case and therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file a private complaint. Upon being satisfied that investigation was necessary, the Criminal Court referred the matter to the respondent police for investigation. It is submitted that without conducting any proper investigation, the respondent police have closed the complaint as “Civil in Nature”. It is submitted that the allegations of the petitioner relate to forgery and misrepresentation and, therefore, they cannot be treated as being purely civil in nature.
Learned counsel for respondent No.4 is also present and submits that the dispute is civil in nature and, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
Upon hearing all the parties, this Court finds that the complaint of the petitioner, which was referred by the Criminal Court, has been closed by the respondent police as "Civil in Nature". It is also the case of the petitioner that he has already filed a protest petition before the trial Court. Therefore, it is for the trial Court to consider the same in accordance with law. In view thereof, nothing further survives for consideration in the present writ petition at this stage. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, all miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.