Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Kumar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 14 July, 2023
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra, Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45778-DB
Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5363 of 2023
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA who appears on behalf of State-respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no. 2 and 3 to conduct fair and proper investigation in Case Crime No. 0342 of 2022 under Sections 377, 313, 452, 323, 504, 506, 498 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act at Police Station allawna, District Hardoi and also for a direction to the opposite party no. 2 to transfer the investigation in any other police station of District Hardoi or in other District.
3. Learned AGA has pointed out Annexure-2 to the writ petition that the petitioner had come with same facts earlier before this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition NO. 2693 of 2023 (Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Vs. State of U.P. and others) and it was informed to the Court that charge sheet has already been prepared on 2.4.2023 and has been forwarded to the Supervisory Authority to submit the same before the court concerned, therefore, this Court has dismissed the writ petition as infructuous.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Supervisory Authority has returned the charge sheet and directed for further investigation, therefore, this Court can interfere and ensure that fair investigation take place.
5. This Court does not find any documentary evidence with regard to the oral argument made by the learned counsel for the petitioner having been filed in the writ petition.
6. Learned AGA has raised a preliminary objection regarding the prayer made by the petitioner in this petition as such direction cannot be granted by this Court in these proceedings.
7. We have perused the averments made in the writ petition and are not convinced that any direction, as has been prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition, can be granted in these proceedings. The Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and others, reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 relying upon an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in (2008) 2 SCC 469 has held that this Court normally should not entertain such petitions for the reason that complainant in such situations is at liberty to avail the alternative remedy by approaching the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
8. Accordingly, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition, which is hereby disposed of with the observation that it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned by moving an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. If any such application is moved by the petitioner/complainant, the same shall be dealt in accordance with law by the Magistrate concerned.
Order Date :- 14.7.2023
AKK
