The single-judge bench dismissed the criminal miscellaneous writ petition as withdrawn. However, it imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on petitioner no. 1, ordering him to deposit the amount or face recovery as arrears of land revenue.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn; petitioner no. 1 ordered to deposit Rs. 25,000 as cost.
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. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3644 of 2020
Petitioner :- Khan Abdullah Zaman And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mamta Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Faheem Ahmad,Zafar Abbas
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Ms. Mamta Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned A.G.A.
We passed following order on 28.2.2020:
" Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken record.
Put up as fresh on 04.03.2020 in order to enable Ms. Mamta Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners to ensure the presence of petitioner no.1, deponent of the writ petition as the contention of learned counsel for the informant that petitioner no.2 has criminal history of as many as 13 cases including 2 cases under Section 302 I.P.C. and 2 cases under Section 307 I.P.C. whereas petitioner in paragraph no.17 alleges to the contrary.
Office to show the name of Sri Zafar Abbas as counsel for the informant."
Today, Ms. Mamta Singh has filed a supplementary affidavit which is taken on record. We perused the affidavit. The deponent has not been able to deny the allegations of criminal history of petitioner no.2, i.e. his father. Petitioner no.1, present in the court feigns ignorance of criminal history of his father.
We are not convinced with the plea of petitioner no.1 that he had no knowledge about the criminal history of his father (petitioner no.2) which is of as many as 13 cases, merely on the ground that he is based at Pune. We are more than convinced that the above was a futile attempt to hoodwink the Court to procure an order which cannot be countenanced.
Ms. Mamta Singh then prayed for dismissal of writ petition as withdrawn.
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn but with cost of Rs.25,000/to be deposited by petitioner no.1, Khan Abdullah Zaman, son of Shah Zaman Khan r/o Arazibagh, Sadar, Azamgarh, U.P. within a period of four weeks from today, before Registrar General, High Court, Allahabad. In the event of non-payment, it shall be recovered as arrears of land
revenue by the Collector concerned.
Copy of this order be sent to Registrar General of this Court for compliance.
Order Date :- 4.3.2020-SB
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as withdrawn.
What penalty is to be imposed on the petitioner for filing a frivolous petition.
Khan Abdullah Zaman
State Of U.P.
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Pankaj Naqvi
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
