Radha Krishna Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9133 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2298 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Radha Krishna Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Singh Vishen
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.

Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. who appears on behalf of respondents/State.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayer :-

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, by issuing directions to the opposite parties to make proper, fair, impartial and effective investigation in stipulated time in F.I.R. No.30/2022 under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 506 I.P.C. Police Station - Chinhat, District - Lucknow on dated 10.01.2022 in the light of documentary evidence is being annexed as Annexure No.-1 to this writ petition."

It is the case of the petitioner that he lodged the F.I.R. against the accused persons on 10th January, 2022. Thereafter, the accused persons started threatening him to withdraw the case. The Investigating Officer is in collusion with the accused persons therefore this petition has been filed.

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of written instructions received from the S.I. of Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow has stated that the charge sheet has been filed before the supervising authority and proper steps have been taken in the matter. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the State/respondents that the petitioner has a remedy of approaching the Court concerned if he is still has any grievance left to be addressed.

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.

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.

(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Sangeeta Chandra,J.)

Order Date :- 28.3.2023

ML/-