The High Court dismissed a writ petition alleging disturbance by the petitioner's husband and father, ruling that a writ petition is an improper remedy for such personal disputes.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24367 of 2018
Petitioner :- Seema Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that his peaceful life is being disturbed by respondent nos. 5 and 6.
The respondent no. 5 is the husband of the petitioner and respondent no. 6 is the father of the petitioner. It is alleged that both of them are harassing her.
In the above situation, the remedy of the petitioner is to lodge an F.I.R. against the aforesaid private persons or to make a complaint against them before the appropriate court.
The writ petition is not the proper remedy available for the said purpose.
The writ petition is not only devoid of merit but is misconceived and it is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.7.2018 Ishan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition is the proper remedy for distress caused by family members.
Seema
State Of U.P.
5 Others
Pankaj Mithal
Saral Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
