Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned F.I.R. No. 862/2019 under Sections-419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409 I.P.C. lodged on 27.07.2019 at Police StationGomti Nagar, District- Lucknow as well as report dated 25-07-2025 prepared by the investigating officer, which copy are contained as Annexure No.1 and 7 to this writ petition; issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party no.3 not to harass/arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.."

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., but during the course of investigation, he was being harassed since long, hence, he had approached to this Court by means of Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 9496 of 2022 (Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.), which was disposed of by means of the order dated 16.12.2022.

¶16

4. The order dated 16.12.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 9496 of 2022 reads as under:"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA. In view of proposed order notice to opposite party no. 4 is dispensed with.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that despite the fact that the present petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. No. 0862 of 2019, P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow (East), Police Commissionerate, Lucknow but the police is harassing him for no cogent reasons. Therefore, he has requested that direction may be issued to the concerned police authorities not to harass the petitioner or his family members.

¶18

Be that as it may, if pursuant to the F.I.R. No. 0862 of 2019, P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow (East), Police Commissionerate, Lucknow the investigation is going on, it is expected that such investigation shall be conducted and concluded strictly in accordance with law fairly and impartially but in the name of investigation no exercise may be carried out which may be considered as harassment but at the same time it is also incumbent upon the parties to cooperate in the investigation. However, only on the basis of allegations that police is unnecessarily harassing the petitioner, no direction can be passed. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of."

¶19

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the investigation has still not been concluded, but the petitioner is being harassed.

¶20

CRLP No. 8221 of 2025

¶21

2

¶22

6. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of the instructions, submits that the charge-sheet has been filed against the named accused. He further submits that reason of delayed investigation is change/transfer of officers and the investigation is going on against the petitioner whose name is surfaced during investigation. 7. In view of above, the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate Lucknow is directed to file an affidavit explaining therein as to why the investigation in F.I.R. No. 862 of 2019 (supra) has not been concluded till date even after passing of about six years. Let the affidavit be filed within a period of two weeks.

¶23

8. List this case on 26.09.2025 as fresh.

¶24

Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions submit that the investigation has been completed and the Investigating Officer had moved an application to the concerned court for issuance of N.B.W but since an application for anticipatory bail was filed by the accused, therefore, the N.B.W was not issued, however, the anticipatory bail application has been dismissed subsequently.

¶25

He further submit that on account of laxity in investigation the action was also taken against one of the Investigating Officer.

¶26

5.Faced with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petition may be dismissed as not pressed with liberty to avail the appropriate remedy available to him under law. To which there is no objection by the other side.

¶27

The petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed with liberty aforesaid.

¶28

October 10, 2025

¶29

Shahnaz

¶30

(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Meera Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Sharif Khan @ Shareed Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Rajiya and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Shalu Tiwari Vs Pawan Tiwari

Akram Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Rahul Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others