Criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging a notice under Cr.P.C. 151/107/116 for threat to peace dismissed on condition that petitioner submit reply for subsequent review.
Petitioner directed to submit reply within two weeks for consideration before proceeding further.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180546-DB
Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10222 of 2023
Petitioner :- Fr Louis Mascarenhas Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Tripathi,Syed Imran Ibrahim,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This petition is directed against a notice issued to the petitioner U/s 151/ 107/ 116 Cr.P.C whereby the petitioner has been called upon to submit reply in the context of a threat to peace occurring at the spot on account of certain construction which are being raised at the premises itself. Various arguments are raised on behalf of the petitioner who contend that the notice itself is without jurisdiction.
On behalf of the State Sri P.C. Srivastava learned Additional Advocate General states that apart from the petitioner such notices have been issued to more than hundred of persons as there had been an apprehension of breach of peace at the spot and all issues of fact as are being raised by the petition can be examined in the event, petitioner submits a reply to the notice itself.
Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner states that there is a threat of petitioner's arrest in the event, he appears personally before the authority to submit the reply.
In the facts of the case, we find such apprehension of the petitioner to be wholly baseless. We find substance in the argument of State
counsel that at this stage only a notice has been issued and, therefore, various arguments advanced in support of the petition need not engage our attention as the competent authority is expected to deal with those submissions at the first instance. It is therefore provided that in the event the petitioner submits his reply to the notice, the same shall be considered by the authority competent by passing reasoned order before proceeding any further. We record the statement of the Senior Counsel for the petitioner that such reply would be submitted within two weeks from today and such objection shall be dealt with by the competent authority while passing a reasoned order.
Subject the observations made above, this petition stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.9.2023 C. MANI
Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether High Court needs to engage with jurisdictional objections contained in the petition at this stage before the petitioner submits a reply.
Whether the apprehension of petitioner's arrest upon appearing to submit reply is baseless.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Fr Louis Mascarenhas
State of U.P.
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
