Dismissed

Mohd Shamim v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2023CRLP/11563/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to an FIR. The court ordered the Investigating Officer to conduct DNA profiling to ascertain the paternity of a child before submitting the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., but ultimately dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed; the Investigating Officer is directed to conduct DNA profiling and submit a report before filing the final chargesheet.

Mohd Shamim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149852-DB

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11563 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Mohd Shamim Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the legality and validity of the FIR dated 24.06.2023 registered as Case Crime No.0255 of 2023, under Sections 323, 506, 493 I.P.C. P.S. Nawabganj, District Jhansi.

¶8

The present F.I.R. was registered by respondent no. 4 Nahid against the petitioner with specific allegation that in the year 2020, the petitioner approached her and developed friendship with her. Not only this, without getting marriage, he made physical relationship with her from which a boy was born, who is now of 3-4 months.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that this boy is not from the petitioner but he is son of erstwhile husband Shahjad. To ascertain the paternity of the newly born boy, his DNA profiling has to be done with petitioner as well as with Shahjad. This profiling of D.N.A. shall be done by the Investigating OfÏcer after taking the leave of learned C.J.M., Jhansi, who will also monitor its progress and must receive the report from concerned Laboratory. The Court is having grave concern about the paternity of the boy. The D.N.A. report shall be submitted by the petitioner within six months from today. The concerned Investigating OfÏcer shall submit report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. after having paternity of that boy.

¶10

Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to pass any order protecting the interest of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 26.7.2023 Rmk.

¶12

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd Shamim v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Shamim v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Gullu @ Vishnu Gopal Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Prachi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Sushila Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deeksha Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Parwati and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others