Disposed

Smt. Rajni Jindal v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2018CRLP/37217/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the High Court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad, to conduct a fair and unbiased investigation and conclude the F.I.R. case within two months due to allegations of delay and threats against the complainant.

What did the court decide?

The Sr. S.P., Ghaziabad directed to ensure effective investigation and conclude the case within two months.

Smt. Rajni Jindal Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 37217 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Rajni Jindal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the materials on record.

¶6

The grievance of the petitioner is that though she has lodged an F.I.R. dated 8.3.2018 against the private respondents no. 4 to 7 which has been registered as Case Crime No. 512 of 2018, under Section 364 IPC Police Station Sahibabad District Ghaziabad but the respondent-authorities are not concluding the investigation.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant petitioner that the first information report has been lodged against the respondents no.4 to 7 in the aforesaid case. The police authorities are neither arresting the private respondents nor concluding the investigation. The private respondents who are influential persons are extending constant threats to the life and security of the complainant and the witnesses. The petitioner has great apprehension that any casualty can take place at any moment.

¶8

Per contra learned AGA contended that the fair and unbiased investigation is the quintessence of criminal justice. The respondent authorities are under bounden duty to carry out fair and unbiased investigation at the earliest so as to sift verity and truthfulness of the offence.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as well as the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is provided that the Sr. Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad respondent no.2, shall look into the matter and shall ensure that effective and proper investigation be carried out and concluded at the earliest preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶10

With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed o

¶11

Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Naim

Smt. Rajni Jindal v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rajni Jindal v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Tripathi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Waris Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sangeeta Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Bhartiya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Safayddin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others