The court held that execution of a Section 145 Cr.P.C. possession order lies with the appropriate authority under the Cr.P.C., not the High Court under Article 226, and dismissed the writ petition.
The writ petition seeking mandamus to direct the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to put the petitioner in possession was dismissed.
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. - 5889 of 2019 Petitioner :- Asha Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
"issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent No.2 (Sub Divisional Magistrate Mohmdabad Gohana District Mau) to take prompt action in the matter and put the petitioner in possession over the plot no. 334 area 0.077 air situated in village Jalalpur, Paragana and Tehsil Mohmdabad Gohana, District Mau immediately."
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Siddhant Sahu
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can grant a writ of mandamus for execution of a Section 145 Cr.P.C. order when the executing authority has adequate powers under Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Asha Devi
State Of U.P.
2 Others
3 Others
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
