Dismissed

Shivani Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2021CRLP/17146/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the writ petition seeking direction for fair investigation, holding that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 156 (3) Cr. P.C. before the Magistrate. The petition is dismissed without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to move an appropriate application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P.C. before the concerned Magistrate.

Shivani Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17146 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Shivani Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Yadav,Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed, praying for the following relief:-

¶7

"(i) To Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents authorities to conduct fair and impartial investigation in respect of the FIR dated 22.10.2020, registered as Case Crime No. 0213 of 2020, under Sections 354 (Ka), 376-D, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Talgram, District Kannauj.

¶8

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to arrest the respondent no.4 and other co-accused persons which are not named in the FIR and conclude the investigation of the aforesaid case in stipulated period" .

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Investigating Officer is not properly investigating the matter and collusively not taking action against the accused i.e. the respondent no.4.

¶10

Be that as it may, the petitioner has a remedy under Section 156 (3) Cr. P.C. to moved an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate. This legal position has also been clarified by this Court vide judgment dated 27.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 15692 of 2020 (Ajay Kumar Pandey Versus State of U.P. and 2 others).

¶11

In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any good reason to entertain this writ petition. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate. In the event such an application is filed by the petitioner, it is expected that the concerned Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 1.2.2021/T.S.

Shivani Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivani Devi 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyendra Kumar Nagar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Yadav @ Guddu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raj Kumar Vishwakarma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra Agnihotri and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohammad Irfan and 4 Others Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Sunil Bind and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others