Bombay High Court
M/S. POONAM CHAMBERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is not maintainable and is dismissed.
Summary
Poonam Chambers filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the police to register an FIR based on a complaint dated 23 December 2017, invoking the principles laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and Lalita Kumari v. State of UP. The High Court examined the petition in light of the recent Supreme Court judgment in Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra (2026), which held that such petitions are not maintainable when statutory remedies are available. The Court concluded that the petitioner must pursue the ordinary statutory remedies and that the writ petition cannot compel the police to register the FIR. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. The order directs the petitioner to avail herself of the appropriate legal remedies under the law.
Issues considered
- What is the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandatory registration of an FIR?
- Whether the High Court can direct police personnel to register an FIR based on a private complaint?
- Effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra on the petition.
Subjects
- Writ petition
- Article 226
- FIR registration
- Mandamus
- Police duty
- Criminal Procedure
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
Sbw 170-WP-4887-2018 .doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4887 OF 2018
Poonam Chambers … Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
Mr. Subhash Jha (through VC) a/w Mr. Sumeet Upadhya, Ms. Prachi Kabra,
Mr. Chetan Gogawale and Ms. Hetal Jain for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ashish I. Satupute, APP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 12th June, 2026
P.C.:-
1) By this Petition under under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the Petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-
“(a) That this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or
any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction in the nature of
mandamus, thereby directing the Respondents to take cognizance of the
complaint dated 23rd December, 2017, being Exhibit - ‘A’ annexed herewith
by registering an FIR against the accused named in the complaint in the
light of the decisions of the Apex Court in the matter of State of Haryana vs.
Bhajan Lal – (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 335 and that of the constitution bench
Digitally signed
by SANDHYA
SANDHYA BHAGU
WADHWA
BHAGU Date: 1/2
WADHWA 2026.06.22
17:47:33
+0530
Sbw 170-WP-4887-2018 .doc
in the matter of Lalita Kumari vs. State of P (2014) 2 SCC 1;
(b) That this Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to take
action against the erring police personnel of Worli Polie Station, Mumbai
for having not registered an FIR, based on the complaint dated 23 rd
December, 2017, being Exhibit - ‘A’ annexed herewith in the light of dictum
of the Apex Court in the matter of Lalita Kumari vs. State of UP (2014) 2
SCC 1 in para 120.4”.
2) In view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court, in the case
of Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798, present Petition which seeks
registration of a crime on the basis of complaint dated 23 rd December, 2017,
is not maintainable.
2) The Petitioner is at liberty to avail the statutory remedies in
accordance with law.
3) In view of the aforesaid, the Petition stands disposed off.
(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
2/2
Checking your session…