Dismissed

Gorakh Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024CRLP/8514/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition seeking certiorari to quash orders denying Section 156(3) CrPC application and mandamus to order FIR lodging. Court dismissed petition noting petitioner had no title to land where trees were located as they were auctioned.

What did the court decide?

Certiorari to quash impugned orders and mandamus to order FIR lodged both dismissed.

Gorakh Nath vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74387

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8514 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Gorakh Nath

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Pratap Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶8

Heard.

¶9

Present petition has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶10

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 21.7.2023 passed by Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ist / Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Sultanpur and order dated 9.9.2024 passed by Addl. Session Judge Court No. 13 Sultanpur in Criminal Revision No. 291/2023 as contained in Annexure No. 1 and 2 to the writ petition, in the interest of justice.

¶11

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No. 1 to lodge first information report against the opposite party No. 2 to 4, in the interest of justice."

¶12

By the impugned order dated 21.07.2023, the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), First/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur, (in short "Magistrate") has rejected the application of the petitioner preferred under Section 156(3) CrPC. The relevant portion of the order dated 21.07.2023 is extracted hereinunder:-

¶13

" ससननतथनपनथरननपतवथनननककआखयनकनअवललकनककयन। थनननककआखयनकनअन स नरआवनदकदनरनपनडडकनकटननकनसमबनधमम " सहकनरर ससघरनमगसज " कवकनसखणडभनदरदनरनउकपनडडककनरलनमरहनतससहनयकआयसक एवससहनयककनबनधकसहकनररतनजनपदअमनठरकनआदनशकनअनसपनलनमम पकनकशतददकनकजनगरणपनपरकदननसक 22.05.23 कनकमममकनयमनन स नरनरलनमर 22.05.23 कलहहआहद।उककनसमबनधममककसरपकनरकनकलईमसकदमनथननन सथननरयपरदजरनहहहद।पकतललकपयनससनथससलगहद। पनथरननपतममपनथरदनरनकवपकरगणपरकदननसक 22.05.2023 कलसभरपनडडकल कनटकरसरहसगरकनबलपरउठनलनजननन , भदर - भदरगनललयनसद न नवजननसनमनरननकक धमककद न नकनअकभयलगपनथरननपतममलगनयनगयनहह। जबककथननन ककआखयनक " " अन स नरकवपकरगणदनरनपनडडकन कटननकन समबनधम सहकनररससघरनमगसज कवकनसखणडभनदरदनरनउकपनडडककनरलनमरहनतस सहनयकआयकएवस स सहनयक कनबनधकसहकनररतनजनपदअमनठरकन आदनशकन अनसपनलनमम पकनकशतदकनकद जनगरणपनपरकदननसक 22.05.23 कन कममम कनयमनन स नरनरलनमर 22.05.23 हहईह लजसककपकतललकपससलगह।आवद नदकदनरनगनटनसस० 505 भभकमधररवपरननरस आबनदरगनटनसस० 509 कन जसजभनगपरपनडडकलससथतहलननबतनयनगयनह , ककनत आवनदकककओरसन इससमबनधमम उकगनटनकन रनजसवअकभलनखदनलखलनहह ककयन गयन ह।ह

¶14

उपरलककववनचननकनआधनरपरपनथरननपतममससजनयअपरनधकनहलनननहहपनयन जनतनहद।पनथरननपतखनररजककयनजनननयलगयहद। आदनश

¶15

पनथरननपतअनतगरतधनर 156 (3) दस०प०सस०खनररजककयनजनतनहद। " Being aggrieved, petitioner filed the Criminal Revision No. 291 of 2023 (Gorakhnath vs. Pramod Kumar & Others), which was also dismissed by the Revisional Court vide impugned order dated 09.09.2024. The relevant portion of the order dated 09.09.2024 is extracted hereinunder:-

¶16

" महननउभयपकडकनकवदननअलधवकनकलससननएवसअवरनयनयनलयककपतनवलरव उपलबधपपतडकनसमयकपररशरलनककयन।

¶17

पनथर / कनगरननरकतनरदनरनअपननकनगरननरममयहआधनरललयनगयनहदकककवदनन अवरनयनयनलयदनरनपनथरदनरनदनलखलककयनगयनकनगजरसनकयडहरनपनडडकक कटननकनफलटलआकदपरगगरननकरकनमनमनननढसगसनमनतथनननककआखयनकन आधनरपरआदनशपनररतकरकदयनहद।यहसपषहदककआवनदक / कनगरननरकतनरव कवपकरगणकनमधयकववनकदतपनडडकनसमबनधममपकडममलसकवलमसकदमनचलनथनजल कनगरननरकतनरकनअन स नरखनररजहलगयनलजसकनसमबनधममकनगरननरकतनरनन कनगरननरकनधनरन -3 ममभरउलनखककयनहद।कनगरननरकतनरननउकधनरनममयहसवरकनर ककयनहदककलजसकववनकदतभभकमकनबनबतलसकवलवनदसस 0 436 / 2003 चलनथन , उसरकववनकदतभभकमपरससथतपनडडकनबनबतकनगरननरकतनरदनरनअवरनयनयनलयकन समकपनथरननपतअनतगरतधनरन -156 (3) दणडपककयनससकहतनपसतसतककयनगयन थन , लजसनकवदननअवरनयनयनलयननयहकहकरखनररजकरकदयनकककववनकदतपनडड ककनरलनमरकनयमनन स नरककगयरहद। कनगरननरपनथरननपत 3 कककधनरन -03 कनअन स नरकववनकदतपनडडककबनबतएक सनधनरणवनदसस० 436/03 सहकनररसघरनमगसजबननमलनलबहनदसरयनदव जभ०हन०सकभलरनमगसजचलनथनजलकवदननअपरमसखयनयनकयकमलजसट ट न , ककसस 019, ससलतननपसरदनरनखनररजकरकदयनगयन।ऐसरससथकतकनजबकककववनकदतपनडड ककससथकतकनससबसधममएकसकमनयनयनलयदनरनकनणरयपनररतककयनजनचसकनहद , उनहहकववनकदतपनडडकनबनरनममकनगरननरकतनर / आवनदकदनरनपनथरननपतअनतगरत धनरन -156 (3) दणडपककयनससकहतनपसतसतककयनगयनहद , लजसनकवदननअवर नयनयनलयननसपषरपसनसमसकचतआधनरउकललखतकरतनहहएखनररजककयनहद। कवलधवयवसथनमनससरधरनबननमअपरसनशनजज , इलनहनबनद 2002 एएलजन 2117 : 2002 कक०लन०जनरल 4292 इलन०मममनननरयउचचनयनयनलयदनरन अकभकनधन र रतककयनगयनककपसनररकणअलधकनररतनकनअधरनआपवनकदकमनमलड ममहरहसतकनपककयनजनननचनकहए।अवरनयनयनलयननआवनदककनकवदननअलधवकन कलससनकरपनथरननपतममससजनयअपरनधकनहलननननपनतनहहएपनथरननपतअनतगरत धनरन -156(3) दस०प०सस०कलखनररजकरकदयन।इसपकनरअवरनयनयनलयनन पशनगतआदनशपनररतकरननममकलईकवलधकतसकटयनकनतनलधकनरसमबनधरतसकट कनररतनहहककगयरहद।लजसममहसतकनपककयनजनननकककलईआवशयकतनपतरतनहह हलतरहद।अवरनयनयनलयदनरनपनररतपशनगतआदनशककपसकषकरतनहहए कनगरननरकतनरदनरनदनलखलकनगरननरआधनरहरनवबलहरनहलननकनकनरणकनरसत ककयनजनननयलगयहद।

¶18

आदनश फगजदनररकनगरननरकनरसतककजनतरहदतथनअवरनयनयनलयदनरनपनररतआदनश कदननसककत 21.07.2023 ककपसकषककजनतरहद। आनदनशककएकपकतकनसनथअवरनयनयनलयककपतनवलरअकवलमबकनरमनन स नर वनपसककजनयन। "

¶19

As per case of the petitioner on 22.05.2023 at about 07:00 PM, private opposite parties cut the trees situated over Gata/Plot No. 509, alleged to be of petitioner, and on being opposed hurled abuses to the petitioner and others.

¶20

The records i.e. Copy of the Khatauni of 1427-1432 Fasli Year

¶21

(01.07.2019 to 30.06.2025), indicates that Gata/Plot No. 509 does not belong to the petitioner and the same is recorded as 'Shreni 6(2)'.

¶22

The records also indicates that according to the petitioner, the private opposite parties committed the crime on 22.05.2023 at about 07:00 PM. However, the application, for the first time, in terms of Section 156(3) CrPC was given after huge delay.

¶23

The records further indicates that the trees in issue situated over Gata/Plot No. 509, over which the petitioner is claiming his rights, were auctioned in compliance of the order of Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, District-Amethi and this finding has not been challenged in this petition by means of pleadings and documents in support thereof.

¶24

Upon due consideration of aforesaid as also the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, according to which, the application under Section 156(3) CrPC ought to have been allowed as also the submission of learned AGA Sri S.P. Tiwari, according to which, no interference is required in the matter for the reason that the trees were auctioned in terms of the order of Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, District-Amethi and also that petitioner has no right over the said trees in view of the fact that indisputely, the trees in issue were situate over Gata No. 509, which is not recorded in the name of petitioner, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. Petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶25

Order Date :- 12.11.2024 Vinay/-

¶26

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

Gorakh Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorakh Nath v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tesamullah and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Nokhey and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Rajendra Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ji Maurya @ Ram Ji Lal Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Gorakh Nath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others