Dismissed

Smt. Anshu v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2023/782/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court ordered dismissed a criminal revision challenging the rejection of a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application. The Court held that the applicant had an equally efficacious alternative remedy of filing a complaint against the respondents, who are gazetted officers, and no prosecution permission was obtained. The revision was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh complaint.

What did the court decide?

The revision was dismissed. The revisionist is allowed to file a fresh complaint before the concerned court, which shall be decided on merits without regard to delay.

Smt. Anshu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:42780

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 782 of 2021

¶4

Revisionist :- Smt. Anshu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Revisionist :- Alok Srivastava,Gaurav Nigam,Nagendra Pratap Singh,Pankaj Kumar Dixit,Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶6

The present criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.c has been moved by the revisionist against the order dated 26.10.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Gonda, in Misc. Criminal Case No. 267 of 2021 (Anshu Vs. Sharad Awasthi and another) under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. relating to Police Station Motiganj District Gonda whereby the the application moved under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C has been rejected.

¶7

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the application has been rejected in an arbitrary manner. The revisionist is a major girl aged about 19 years and her date of birth is 01.01.2003. The revisionist performed marriage with her own free will to Sanjay and against the wishes of her family members. Being annoyed with the act of revisionist and her husband, the father of the revisionist got the revisionist and her husband harassed in collision with respondent No. 3 and 4. The respondent No.4 badly assaulted the husband of the revisionist under the influence of father of revisionist. The revisionist

¶8

made complaint to the higher police authorities for taking suitable action against the respondent No. 3 and 4 but when no action was taken the revisionist moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C for lodging the FIR but the learned court below rejected the said application vide order dated 26.10.2021.

¶9

On the contrary learned A.G.A submitted that the revisionist has an equally efficacious alternative remedy of filing complaint against respondent No. 3 and 4.

¶10

Heard rival submissions and perused the record.

¶11

As per office report dated 24.05.2022 notice issued to the respondents has been personally served, however, in spite of service of notice neither the respondents have put in appearance nor any counter has been filed on their behalf.

¶12

Having heard the rival submissions the Court is of the view that the revisionist has an equally efficacious alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the respondents No. 3 and 4, moreover no permission is obtained for prosecuting the respondents No. 3 and 4 from the concerned department as both are Gazetted Officers.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court find no merits in the revision.

¶14

The revision is accordingly, dismissed.

¶15

However, it is open for the revisionist to avail remedy of

¶16

complaint before the Court concerned. In the event any complaint is filed the same shall be decided on its merits without going into the question delay.

¶17

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 4.7.2023 Nadeem

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Anshu v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anshu v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Asarey Vs State of U.P.

Manish Verma Thru. His Father Kailash Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Shrawan Kumar Gupta and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Khotau Singh @ Indrapal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Param Kishore Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Prem Shankar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another