Dismissed

Vijay Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2020A227/3121/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227, the High Court dismissed a challenge to a revision order that stayed a firearm release order. The Court refused to intervene, holding that the firearm cannot be released pending the investigation into the alleged forgery of the petitioner's licence.

What did the court decide?

The petition dismissing the request to set aside the revision order staying the release of the firearm.

Vijay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3121 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijay Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arpan Srivastava,Anil Bhushan (Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anil Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Arpan Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondents.

¶6

Learned trial court /learned In-charge Civil Judge (Senior Division) A.C.J.M.-II, Gorakhpur had released the fire arm of the petitioner on the foot that the petitioner was in possession of a valid arms licence. The State-respondent took the order of the learned trial court/learned In-charge Civil Judge (Senior Division) A.C.J.M.-II, Gorakhpur in revision. The learned revisional court /learned Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur in the impugned order dated 18.09.2020 notices the submission of the State/revisionist that the fire arm licence of the petitioner was a forged one, in regard to which, a criminal case has been instituted which is registered as Case Crime No.778 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 IPC. Accordingly, the learned revisional court /learned Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur has held the order of the learned trial court in abeyance.

¶7

The pendency of the criminal case, registered as Case Crime No.778 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 IPC wherein the forged arm licence is under investigation, is not disputed.

¶8

Nothing has been shown from the pleadings or the record to demonstrate that the Case Crime No.778 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 IPC in regard to forged fire arm licence is not registered or pending.

¶9

Even if the argument of the learned Senior Counsel Sri Anil Bhushan, for the petitioner is taken on its face value that the revision was not maintainable, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner. For any order in favour of the petitioner would revive an admittedly illegal order of the learned trial court.

¶10

The fire arm cannot be released in favour of the petitioner till the legal process investigating the forged arms licence is complete.

¶11

The petition is dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 26.11.2020 Ashish Tripathi

Vijay Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Avnesh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vicky Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Syed @ Mohd Javed and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ramjas Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devi Dayal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another