In this criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the High Court dismissed the petition without expressing an opinion on merits. The court held that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to approach the concerned Magistrate for investigation directions.
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. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4107 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sunita Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kumar Dhananjay
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to investigate the matter fair and properly within a stipulated period in regard to impugned FIR No.131 of 2021, dated 18.04.2021, Under section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad"
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigating officer is not properly investigating the matter and collusively not taking action against the accused.
Be that as it may, the petitioner has a remedy under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. to move 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 vs. State of U.P. and others) .
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 under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. In the event such an application is filed by the petitioner, it is expected that the concerned Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.7.2021 T.S.
Digitally signed by Justice Surya Digitally signed by Justice Piyush Prakash Kesarwani Agrawal Date: 2021.07.23 16:14:31 IST Date: 2021.07.23 16:15:56 IST Reason: Document Owner Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition should be entertained for directing investigation when a remedy exists under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ajay Kumar Pandey vs. State of U.P. and othersReferred¶9
Ajay Kumar Pandey vs. State of U.P. and others, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.15692 of 2020, judgment dated 27.01.2021
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunita
State Of U.P.
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
