The court directed the opposite party to register the petitioner's written report as an FIR pursuant to the judgment in Lalita Kumari, directing follow-up action.
Direction to opposite party No. 6 to register the petitioner's report as an FIR and take follow-up action.
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.
CRLMP No. 1550 of 2016
07 09.01.2020
Heard Mr. A.N. Pattanayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Senapati, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State opposite parties, and perused the record.
The petitioner has filed this application seeking direction to the opposite parties to take appropriate action against opposite parties no.7 to 10 to stop illegal and unauthorized construction and filing of “Jalasaya” made by them in pursuance of the order of the Enforcement Officer of CDA.
Considering the submissions made, this Court directs opposite party No. 6 to register the written report submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-1 series as FIR and take follow up action in accordance with law, in view of the law laid down by the apex Court in Lalita Kumari V. State of U.P ., A.I.R. 2014 S.C. 187 that the written report received should be registered by the police.
With the above direction, the CRLMP stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Alok
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the proper authority should register the written report submitted by the petitioner as an FIR.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lalita Kumari V. State of U.PExplained¶5
**_Lalita Kumari V. State of U.P_ .,** A.I.R. 2014 S.C. 187 · Who else cites this
State opposite parties
Alok
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
