Dismissed

Nazreen Khatoon v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2021A227/1297/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside orders passed by a Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and an Additional District Sessions Judge in a revision under the POCSO Act. The court held that there was no breach of peace and the orders were legally sound.

What did the court decide?

The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is dismissed as it lacks merit.

Nazreen Khatoon Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 85 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1297 of 2021 Petitioner :- Nazreen Khatoon Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Prakash Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ganesh Kumar

¶2

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Ganesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material on record.

¶4

The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the order dated 29.10.2020 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khaliabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar in Case No. 26 of 2018, Computer Case No. T201817650207190 (Smt. Nazreen Khatoon Vs. Sadre Alam) under Section 145 Cr.P.C. as well as to set aside the order dated 11.11.2020 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (POCSO Act-1), District Sant Kabir Nagar in Criminal Case No. 179 of 2020 (Smt. Nazreen Khatoon Vs. State of U.P. and another), whereby criminal revision filed against the aforesaid order has been rejected.

¶5

The matter is purely with regard to breach of peace and the learned Magistrate has discussed every aspect, while passing the order impugned has observed that at this stage there is no possibility of breach of peace. The revisional Court too considered the grievance of the petitioner and came to conclusion that the revision is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1994 SC 1436 Prakash Chand Sachdeva Vs. The State and another, which is not applicable in the present, as in the instant matter peace has already been restored. Thus there is no legal infirmity in the impugned orders.

¶6

Learned counsel further petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the property for consideration of Rs. 35 lacs, this matter can be decided by the civil Court. There is no jurisdiction or power to decide the possession or title of the property under Section 145 Cr.P.C.

¶7

In view of above, the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution lacks merit and is dismissed.

¶8

Order Date :- 25.10.2021/S.Ali

Nazreen Khatoon v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazreen Khatoon v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brajesh Chaturvedi and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abrar Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gurmeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Tarun Verma Nad 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra @ Subhash Vs State of U.P.and Another