No Writ Can Compel Police To Register FIR In Property Disputes; Remedy Under BNSS Must Be Exhausted: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued directing the police to register an FIR or initiate criminal proceedings, particularly in cases arising out of private land or property disputes, holding that aggrieved persons must first avail statutory remedies provided under criminal law before invoking writ jurisdiction.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by Abdul Rashid Khan challenging the refusal of the Single Judge to direct police action on his complaint against private parties in a long-standing land dispute.

The appellant had sought a mandamus commanding the police to act on his complaint and initiate criminal proceedings against private respondents. The Single Judge declined relief, observing that the dispute was essentially civil in nature and that the petitioner had an adequate remedy before the civil court, while directing police authorities to merely ensure that law and order was maintained.

Affirming this view, the Division Bench held that it is “trite” law that High Courts cannot compel the police to convert complaints into FIRs through writ jurisdiction. The Court relied extensively on statutory remedies under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, noting that a person aggrieved by refusal to register an FIR may approach the Superintendent of Police and thereafter the jurisdictional Magistrate under the prescribed procedure. It further observed that dispossession claims relating to immovable property can be addressed through a summary civil suit under the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

Citing binding precedent, including Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe and Radha Krishan Industries, the Bench emphasised that writ jurisdiction should not be exercised when effective alternative remedies exist. The Court reiterated that High Courts have repeatedly cautioned against entertaining petitions seeking directions for FIR registration, as such matters fall within the domain of the Magistrate.

The Bench observed that entertaining writs in such circumstances would bypass the statutory scheme and flood constitutional courts with matters that must first be addressed through criminal procedure mechanisms.

Holding that the Single Judge had taken a “plausible view”, the Court disposed of the appeal and permitted the parties to pursue remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law, clarifying that any future proceedings should be decided independently of the observations made in the writ proceedings.

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Khan v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case No.: M.A.T. 798 of 2025 with I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2025

Click here to read order