Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/3406/2026 of SRI NIPAM BEZBARUAH AND ANR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS on 24 June 2026
GAHC010129102026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3406/2026 SRI NIPAM BEZBARUAH AND ANR S/O- BANAMALI SIL, R/O-PARMANKHOWA, P.O AND P.S-TIHU, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM 2: SRI NANDALAL SARKAR SON OF LT. RAMDHAN SARKAR PO
GAHC010129102026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3406/2026
SRI NIPAM BEZBARUAH AND ANR
S/O- BANAMALI SIL, R/O-PARMANKHOWA, P.O AND P.S-TIHU, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM
2: SRI NANDALAL SARKAR
SON OF LT. RAMDHAN SARKAR
PO AND PS-TIHU
DIST.-NALBARI
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, GOVT OF
ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY 06
2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ASSAM ULUBARI
GUWAHATI
3:THE DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI
4:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
SADIYA POLICE STATION
SADIYA
5:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
DULIAJAN POLICE STATION
DULIAJAN
DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
6:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
DIBRUGARH POLICE STATION
DIBRUGARH
ASSA
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. J. Saikia, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. S. Roy, Advocate
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
25.06.2026
Heard Mr. P. J. Saikia, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 to 6.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners seeking directions upon the Respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 to discharge their duties by carrying out an investigation in respect to the three FIRs filed by the Petitioners in respect to the commission of the same crime before the three Police Stations, i.e. the Sadiya Police Station, the Duliajan Police Station and the Dibrugarh Police Station.
3. It is relevant to take note of that though the Petitioners have claimed that they had submitted FIRs before the Sadiya Police Station and the Duliajan Police Station, both the FIRs were not registered. However, the FIR which was filed by the Petitioners on 14.01.2025 was registered by the Dibrugarh Police Station.
4. The question arises in the instant proceedings as to whether this Court should entertain the present writ petition taking into account that the Petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy by filing an application before the Magistrate exercising the jurisdiction over the Dibrugarh Police Station under Section 175(3) of the BNSS. The law in this regard is well settled as would be apparent from the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakira Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 wherein it has been observed that the Writ Court under Article 226 of the Constitution should not exercise its jurisdiction in as much as an alternative and efficacious remedy is available under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. which corresponds to Section 175(3) of the BNSS.
5. Taking into account the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition for which the writ petition stands dismissed.
6. Before parting with the record, this Court however observes that the dismissal of the instant writ petition is on the ground of being not entertained, and under such circumstances, it shall not bar the Petitioners to approach the concerned Magistrate who exercises jurisdiction over the Dibrugarh Police Station by filing an application under Section 175(3) of the BNSS.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant