Disposed

Sarswati v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2019CRLP/24916/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition was filed seeking direction for fair and impartial investigation under Article 226 due to delay and threats by the accused. The Court directed the Superintendent of Police to supervise the investigation, ensure it is conducted faithfully, and conclude it within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the Superintendent of Police, Farrukhabad to supervise the investigation, ensure it is fair and unbiased, and conclude it within two months.

Sarswati Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24916 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Sarswati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant petition has been filed by the complainant invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to the respondent No.2 to ensure fair and impartial investigation pursuant to the first information report dated 04.09.2019, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST (Prevention of Cruelty) Act 1989 (Amended in 2015) Police Station-Kampil, District-Farrukhabad.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the first information report was lodged against the accused/respondent no.5 under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST (Prevention of Cruelty) Act 1989 (Amended in 2015) on 04.09.2019, in which investigation is going on in snails pace and the accused/respondent No.5 is extending constant threat to the life of the petitioner, who is exerting pressure to withdraw the case. 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 her right to have a fair and impartial investigation against the accused/respondent No.5 involved in the commission of heinous offence.

¶8

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.

¶9

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 Superintendent of Police, Farrukhabad-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.

¶10

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

¶11

Order Date :- 7.12.2019

¶12

Pr/-

Sarswati v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarswati v. State of U.P. and 4 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

Arjun Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mahtab Beg Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Moizuddin and Another Vs State of U.P. and 03 Others

Shivpoojan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Monu and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shahjad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others