Disposed

Geeta Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2023CRLA/3070/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court disposed of the criminal appeal filed by Geeta Devi against the rejection of her u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. application. The court directed the special court to take appropriate action if the appellant files a formal complaint under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. within 20 days.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of with a direction to the special court to take action if the appellant files a complaint under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. within 20 days.

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103991

¶2

Court No. - 81 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3070 of 2023 Appellant :- Geeta Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Manoj Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The instant appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant, Geeta Devi , with the prayer to set aside the judgement and order dated 6.8.2023, passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Deoria in Criminal Misc. Case No.169 of 2022 (Geeta Devi vs. Ganesh Chaurasia and others), u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., P.S. Salemplur, District Deoria and to lodge the FIR against the opposite party nos.2 and investigate the same.

¶6

The only grievance to the appellant appears to be that by passing the impugned order, the special court has rejected the application moved by the appellant u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. requesting for registration of FIR and investigation of the allegations mentioned therein. On being controverted, it is admitted to the learned counsel for the appellant that though the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been rejected but having regard to the law laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in 'Naresh Kumar Valmiki Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.' reported in MANU/UP3410/2022 and in 'Gyanendra Maurya Vs. Union of India' reported in MANU/UP/0238/2023 , the complaint case may be preferred.

¶7

Learned AGA would also have no objection if any complaint case may be filed by the appellant with regard to the allegations levelled in the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., which has been rejected by passing the impugned order.

¶8

Resultantly, the instant appeal is finally disposed of with the direction to the special court that even if any complaint u/s 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. is filed by the appellant within 20 days from today, the special court may take appropriate action pertaining to the same having regard to Section 190 (1) (a) Cr.P.C. and keeping in view the procedure as provided under Chapter-XV of the Cr.P.C.

¶9

Order Date :- 12.5.2023/m.a.

¶10

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AYYUB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Geeta Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geeta Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mannan Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bitti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Santosh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santram Maurya and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ajay Maurya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shashank Shekhar Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another