Disposed

Vinod Tyagi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2023WRIC/29201/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought full-time security as a witness in a criminal case involving police brutality against his brother. The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Competent Committee to address the grievance within three weeks after a hearing to all stakeholders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Competent Committee to address petitioner's grievance within three weeks after hearing stakeholders.

Vinod Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178839-DB

¶2

Court No. - 40

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29201 of 2023 Petitioner :- Vinod Tyagi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Shukla,Awadhesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for providing him full-time security under Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 as he is witness of Complaint Case No. 32526 of 2013 (Ved Prakash v. Awanish Gautam & Others) under Sections 302, 147, 148, 364, 201, 120-B of IPC, Police Station- Kavi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad forthwith.

¶7

In pith and substance, the real brother of the petitioner had died in the custody of police personnel because of brutal torture and the petitioner is continuously under pressure after becoming the complainant in the aforesaid matter as all the police personnel are continuously threatening to him. When the petitioner has moved an application before the police authorities, they have admitted that there is apprehension of danger to the life of the petitioner and they have only provided the security when the date fixed in lower court. So far as providing full-time security is concerned, the authorities have not accepted the same.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel fairly states that grievance of the petitioner would be looked into, examined and remedied by the Competent Committee under Witness Protection Scheme 2018 at the earliest.

¶9

Be that as it may, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending consideration. Without adverting on the merits of the case, the writ petition, on consent, is disposed of with a direction to Competent Committee under Witness Protection Scheme 2018 to ensure that the grievance of the petitioner would be addressed within three weeks, strictly in accordance with law, but certainly after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders in the matter. Order Date :- 15.9.2023/ Rama Kant

¶10

Digitally signed by :- RAMAKANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinod Tyagi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Tyagi 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

Smt. Azizan Vs State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and 3 Others

Smt. Sandhya Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanjeev Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mahendra Pal Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kalwa Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Preeti Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others