Dismissed

Anuj Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Ors.

Allahabad HC2 Mar 2022CRLP/11046/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for quashing the FIR under U/s 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. Act dismissed as infructuous due to efflux of time. Liberty to take legal recourse if consequential proceedings initiated.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous. Interim order vacated. Liberty to file application within two months and take recourse to law if proceedings initiated.

Anuj Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11046 of 2017

¶3

Petitioner :- Anuj Awasthi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner(s) with the following prayers:-

¶6

“(i) To issue a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the F.I.R. dated 14.02.2017, Crime Case No.0072 of 2017, U/s 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC./S.T. Act, Police Station Tikait Nagar, District Barabanki, contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.

¶7

(ii) To issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to harass and arrest the petitioner on the basis of F.I.R. dated 14.02.2017, Crime Case No.0072 of 2017, U/s 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC./S.T. Act, Police Station Tikait Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶8

(iii) To issue any other and further order or direction which this Hon'ble High Court may deem just, fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.

¶9

(iv) Allow the writ petition with cost."

¶10

It appears that by efflux of time, the instant writ petition has become infructuous.

¶11

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous . Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶12

However, it is open for the petitioner(s) to move an appropriate application within two months from today, if the matter survives.

¶13

It is made clear that if any consequential proceedings are initiated in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R., the parties are at

¶14

liberty to take recourse to law.

¶15

[Saroj Yadav, J.] [Ramesh Sinha, J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 2.3.2022 lakshman

¶17

Digitally signed by LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA Date: 2022.03.03 18:20:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anuj Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Awasthi v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mool Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Sarvan Vs State of U.P.

Shahid Thru. His Next Friend/Real Brother Mohd. Azam Vs U.O.I. Thru.Secy. Ministry of Homeint.Securityn.Delhi andORS

Smt. Sudha Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home and 2 Ors.

Ram Chander and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Others

Rishi Kumar Trivedi and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Ors.