In this writ petition seeking directions against respondent harassment and interference in matrimonial life, the Court held that the petition became infructuous upon an FIR being lodged against the petitioner, leading to its dismissal. Order date: 6.8.2020.
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. - 80
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11675 of 2020
Petitioner :- Archna And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents not to harass the petitioners as well as not to interfere in the peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioners except in accordance with law.
At the outset, the learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that an FIR has been lodged against the petitioner no.2 bearing Case Crime No.111 of 2020, under Section 363 of the IPC at Police Station-Uttar, District Firozabad and, as such, the writ petition has become infructuous.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.8.2020 SK
(Jayant Banerji, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the filing of an FIR under Section 363 IPC against a petitioner renders an intervening writ petition infructuous.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Archna And Another
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
