Writ petition concerning anticipated FIR/proceedings; the State reported no FIR was lodged and only Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. proceedings followed a complaint application. With no one appearing for the petitioner, the court held the petition infructuous and dismissed it.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1069 of 2024
Ramesh Kumar Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others
.....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajeev Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 10
HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.
Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions dated 04.03.2024 received from Sri Ram Lal Yadav, Sub Inspector, Police Station Sangrampur, District Amethi, submits that no application for lodging of the F.I.R has been submitted in the matter, however, an application dated 27.07.2022 was received in pursuance whereof the proceedings under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. were undertaken, therefore, this petition has lost its efficacy.
(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)
October 17, 2025
Shahnaz
Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of FIR-related proceedings survived when no FIR was lodged and only Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. proceedings were undertaken.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Kumar Yadav
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Rajnish Kumar
Zafeer Ahmad
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
