Dismissed

Farjana v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2021CRLP/8121/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking transfer of investigation and direction for police report submission, holding that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to approach the Magistrate instead.

What did the court decide?

This writ petition is dismissed without expressing any opinion on merits, leaving the petitioner to move an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

Farjana Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8121 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Farjana Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shabana Nizam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:

¶7

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent authorities to transfer the investigation of case crime no. 215 of 2021, under sections 302, 307 IPC, Police Station Saidpur, District Ghazipur to another investigation agency or another police station.

¶8

II. Issue writ order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing th respondent authority to submit the police report afater making fair investigation of case crime No. no. 215 of 2021, under sections 302, 307 IPC, Police Station Saidpur, District Ghazipur within stipulated time.

¶9

III. Issue a writ order or direction to the respondent authority i.e. respondent no. 3 to decide the representation dated 16.8.2021 within stipulated time.

¶10

IV. To award cost of this petition to the petitioner."

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigating officer is not properly investigating the matter and collusively not taking action against the accused.

¶12

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) .

¶13

In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any good reason to entertain this writ petition. Therefore, without expressing any

¶14

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.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.9.2021 RPD

Farjana v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farjana v. State of U.P. and 7 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

State of U.P. and 5 Others Vs Manoj Kumar and 5 Others

Nauman Ahmad Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Harish Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Bharat Julka and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Taufiq Ahmad @ Guddu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nisha Alias Uzma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others