The single judge disposed of a writ petition involving direction to record statement and ensure investigation, granting liberty to approach the appropriate forum pursuant to the ratio in Sakiri Vasu without expressing an opinion on merits.
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.
WPCRL No. 1125 of 2013
08.09.2017 None appears for the petitioner even on revised call.
Mr. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. Government Advocate is present on behalf of the State opp
osite parties.
Perused the record. The petitioner files this application seeking direction to the cou
rt below to record the statement of the petitioner U/s. 164 Cr.P.C. and further seeks for dire
ction to opposite party no.2 to cause proper investigation in Banki P.S. Case No. 146 of 2013
corresponding to G.R. Case No. 186 of 2013 pending before the court of the learned SDJM, Banki
Mr. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. Government Advocate states that in view the ratio decided
in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 39 OCR (SC) 287 since adequate alternative remedy is
available under the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner ought to have availed the same ins
tead of filing the instant case.
Considering such contention, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits,
disposes of the WPCRL granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum ve
ntilating her grievance in view of the ratio decided in Sakiri Vasu (Supra).
Dr. B. R. Sarangi, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be directed to record statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and ensure proper investigation.
Whether adequate alternative remedy exists under CrPC rendering writ application maintainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.Referred¶5
Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 39 OCR (SC) 287
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State opposite parties
Dr. B. R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court