Dismissed

Saroj Nishad and Another v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Aug 2020HABC/403/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition, the Court addressed a preliminary objection regarding maintainability. Petitioner No. 1 had a related Writ Petition seeking stay on arrest and recording of statement under CrPC 164. The Court held that the petition lacked maintainability.

What did the court decide?

The petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to avail appropriate remedy.

Saroj Nishad and Another Vs State of U P and 3… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 403 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Saroj Nishad And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Sharma,Abhishek Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S.B. Singh holding brief of Sri Rajiv Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.R. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the present habeas corpus petition before this Court. He states that prayer no. 2 made in the present petition that the statement of the corpus-petitioner no. 1 under section 164 Cr.P.C. be directed to be recorded by the Magistrate concerned within a reasonable time. He submits that the corpus-petitioner no. 1 along with petitioner no. 2 has already preferred Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 3009 of 2020 in which a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had stayed the arrest of the petitioners vide order 18.2.2020 and gave a direction for conducting the medical examination of the corpuspetitioner no. 1 and also for recording of her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the corpus-petitioner no. 1 is confined Nari Niketan and due to spread of pandemic Covid-19 Corona Virus, her statement could not be recorded but he could not satisfy the Court regarding the maintainability of the present habeas corpus petition before this Court.

¶8

In view of the above, the present habeas corpus writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law, if so desire.

¶9

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶10

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶11

(Ajit Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶12

Order Date :- 24.8.2020 Shiraz

Saroj Nishad and Another v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Nishad and Another v. State of U P and 3 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

Abhay Singh @ Banti Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lalit Mohan Dubey Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Archana Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others