Disposed

Gajendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2019CRLP/24285/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to ensure a fair, unbiased, and expeditious investigation within two months, superseding delays and intimidation faced by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad, to supervise investigation, issue mandate for fair and unbiased conduct, and conclude within two months.

Gajendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24285 of 2019 Petitioner :- Gajendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Bharti,Alopi Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.

¶4

The instant petition has been filed by the complainant/petitioner invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this court seeking direction to the respondent nos.2 & 3 to conduct fair investigation pursuant to the first information report dated 22.9.2019 registered as Case Crime No.1468 of 2019, under Sections 427,504,506,436 IPC and Section 3(2)(iii) of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad.

¶5

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has lodged an FIR against the respondent nos.4 to 6 on 22.9.2019, but so far no action has been taken by the respondent authorities against them, even no statement of the petitioner and other witness witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The accused respondents are wondering lavishly and extending constant threat and intimidation to the petitioner. As the investigation is going on in snail's pace, the petitioner has no other efficacious remedy except to invoke the extraordinary power conferred upon this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for enforcement of his right to have a fair and impartial investigation against the accused/respondents involved in the commission of offence.

¶6

The learned A.G.A. contended that the fair and impartial investigation is the quintessence of criminal justice. The respondent authorities are under bounden duty to carry out fair and unbiased investigation within the shortest possible time.

¶7

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case substantial and enormous delay on the part of the Investigating Officer will negate the purpose of justice as well as deterrent and rehabilitative effects of the criminal law. Fair and unbiased investigation are the fundamental canons of our criminal jurisprudence and are quite in conformity with the constitutional mandate enshrined in Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India, hence the Investigating Officer cannot shy of his accountability protracting the investigation in the guise of any pretence, it is provided that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad, respondent no.2 shall take effective steps to supervise over the matter issuing mandate to the investigating officer to proceed with the investigation in a very fair, unbiased and impartial manner who will conclude it expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order avoiding unnecessary delay on flimsy ground. The respective parties are also expected to cooperate with the investigation on the call of the Investigating Officer.

¶8

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶9

Order Date :- 28.11.2019/M. Tariq

Gajendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shameem and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sumit Mishra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neetu and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others