Bombay High Court

NARENDRA RUGHUNATH SAWARDEKARversusSENIOR POLICE INSPECTOR RATNAGIRI CITY POLICE STATION AND ORS.

Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: R G AVACHAT AJIT B KADETHANKAR

Holding

A writ of mandamus cannot be issued where the petitioner has not first approached the police and has an alternative remedy available before a Judicial Magistrate.

Summary

The petitioner, Narendra Rughunath Sawardekar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the police to provide immediate protection, to take preventive action against certain individuals, and to register and investigate his complaint. The petition did not include any application to the Superintendent of Police for protection, nor did it address the alternative remedy of approaching the Judicial Magistrate's Court for the other reliefs. The Court observed that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available for the reliefs sought, and that the petition was premature in the absence of a prior application to the police. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, directing that any further action be pursued through the appropriate judicial forum. The dismissal was based on the principle that writ jurisdiction is not available when an alternative remedy exists and the petitioner has not exhausted it.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy for a petitioner seeking police protection and investigation of a complaint?
Does the existence of an alternative remedy preclude the issuance of a writ of mandamus in this context?

Subjects

police protection
mandamus
alternative remedy
writ petition
criminal appellate jurisdiction
judicial magistrate

Judgment

                                                                     904-WP-28-2026.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 28 OF 2026

Narendra Rughunath Sawardekar                                      … Petitioner

                              Versus

Senior Police Inspector Ratnagiri City Police Station              … Respondents
And Ors.

                                 ——————
Mr. Santosh Punalkar i/by Mr. Mayur D. Sapkale for the Petitioner.
Mrs. S. N. Deshmukh, A.P. P. for the Respondent-State.
                                 ——————

                                       Coram :      R.G. AVACHAT &
                                                    AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

                                       Date     :   23rd January 2026.

PER COURT :

1.        Heard.

2.        The petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

           “a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of
           Mandamus directing Respondents to provide immediate and
           adequate police protection to the Petitioner with immediate
           effect;

           b) Direct Respondents to take appropriate preventive action
           against the said persons i.e. Aniket Sawant and Yogesh Magdum
           under law;




Shubham                                1 of 2
                                                                                       904-WP-28-2026.doc


                                 c) Direct registration and investigation of the Petitioner's
                                 complaint in accordance with law;

                                 d) Any other reliefs or directions or orders as this Hon'ble Court
                                 may deem fit in the interest of justice may be passed.

                                 e) Leave to amend, add, alter may be granted in the interest of
                                 justice.”

                      3.        The petitioner has not preferred any application to the concerned

                      Superintendent of Police seeking police protection. So far as the other reliefs

                      are concerned, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of approaching the

                      concerned Court of the Judicial Magistrate. If such course of action is

                      adopted, the proceedings shall be decided on its own merits.

                      4.        In view of the same, the petition stands dismissed.



                           [ AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ]                      [ R.G. AVACHAT, J. ]

TALLE
SHUBHAM
ASHOKRAO
Digitally signed by
TALLE SHUBHAM
ASHOKRAO
Date: 2026.01.27
18:43:46 +0530




                      Shubham                              2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…