This court dismissed a writ petition where the petitioner alleged harassment by respondents in collusion with a police authority. The court noted the vagueness of the allegations and the pendency of a criminal complaint, ruling that extraordinary equitable jurisdiction was not applicable.
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. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5869 of 2019
Petitioner :- Geeta Devi Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
"That Police Authority in collusion with O.P. No. 5 harassing the petitioner and trying their level best to nor the custody of petitioner, namely, Geeta Devi favor of O.P. No. 5 to his separate life."
petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C., summons have already been issued to accused-respondents.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Siddhant Sahu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether writ of mandamus should be granted to prevent alleged harassment and interference in the petitioner's personal life against vague allegations.
Whether the petitioner has exhausted the ordinary remedy by filing a criminal complaint before the Judicial Magistrate.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Geeta Devi
State Of U P
1 Other
4 Others
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajendra Kumar-IV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
