Disposed

Jai Pawan Lal Srivastava v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2023A482/20828/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the Court set aside premature jurisdictional facts and issues regarding ownership and mutation pending before other courts. Instead of examining merits, the Court directed the District Magistrate to decide the pending sanction application expeditiously within one month.

What did the court decide?

The District Magistrate was directed to dispose of the pending sanction application regarding initiation of criminal proceedings within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

Jai Pawan Lal Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169962

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20828 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jai Pawan Lal Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

The present applicant has invoked the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 CrPC beseeching expeditious disposal of the application dated 29.8.2020 moved by the Investigating Officer, which is pending consideration before the District Magistrate (opposite party No. 2), seeking grant of sanction for initiating criminal proceeding against opposite party No. 5, Akhilanand, who is posted as Lekhpal in the revenue department.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that opposite party No. 5, Akhilanand being Lekhpal has illegally recorded the name of accused namely Suresh Yadav, Rajesh Yadav and Avdhesh Yadav in the revenue record in place of Smt. Malti Devi whereas mutation proceeding is still pending before the court concerned. Against the illegal act of opposite party No. 5, an FIR has been lodged by the present applicant with an averment that the land in question basically belongs to his family, however, name of Malti Devi was recorded as subtenant, who had died on 23.2.2010 and the mutation proceeding is still pending consideration, however, in the meantime, the accused Suresh Yadav, Rajesh Yadav and Avdhesh Yadav have got their name recorded in the revenue record in collusion with Lekhpal (opposite party No. 5). After due investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet dated 19.10.2019 against four accused including opposite party No. 5, Lekhpal. It is also submitted that in the meantime, SubDivisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ghazipur has also submitted its report dated 28.8.2017 (annexure No. 5) for inculpating the respondent No. 5 for his overt act in the commission of alleged offence. In pursuance of the charge sheet, the Investigating Officer has made a communication dated 29.8.2020 to the District Magistrate with a prayer to grant sanction against opposite party No. 5 to initiate criminal proceeding against him

¶9

as required under law. Since the date of moving said communication to the District Magistrate, the same is still pending consideration and no fruitful steps have been taken to decide the aforesaid representation/application at the end of learned District Magistrate. It is further submitted that due to the pendency of the communication dated 29.8.2020, for getting sanction to initiate criminal proceeding against opposite party No. 5, entire criminal proceeding is held up. It is further submitted that in this respect, learned CJM has also made query several times to the Investigating Officer with respect to the outcome of the aforesaid communication.

¶10

Learned AGA has no objection in case a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid application dated 29.8.2020 moved by the Investigating Officer by this Court within stipulated period.

¶11

In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present application, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present application, with a direction to District Magistrate, Ghazipur (opposite party No. 2) before whom the aforementioned application dated 29.8.2020 (annexure No. 11) moved by the Investigating Officer/Senior Sub-Inspector to initiate criminal proceeding against the opposite party No. 5 under Sections 218, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC is pending disposal, to decide the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of one month , in accordance with law, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, present application is disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 23.8.2023 vinay

¶14

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jai Pawan Lal Srivastava v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Pawan Lal Srivastava v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

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

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shriram Saroj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit Kumar @ Deepak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Jiledar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Fino Payments Bank Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others