Shashikanta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 2852 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Shashikanta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 1 February, 2024

Author: Sangeeta Chandra

Bench: Sangeeta Chandra

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9517-DB
 
Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 735 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Shashikanta
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Puttu Lal Misra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jaikaran
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
 

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent and Shri Jaikaran, Advocate, who has filed his power on behalf of respondent no.4 along with short-counter affidavit, wherein it has been stated that the victim had died during the treatment in District Hospital.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main reliefs:-

(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Certiorari' thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 26.12.2023 bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 0476 of 2023, U/s. 147, 341, 323, 352, 427, 506, 308, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Raebareli so far it is against the present petitioner (impugned FIR is contained in Annexure-01.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus' commanding and directing the concerned respondent authorities to ensure impartial, fair and transparent investigation in the matter.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of 'Mandamus' commanding and directing the concerned respondent authorities to ensure transfer of the investigation to any other impartial investigating.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner had approached this Court in Writ Petition No.167 of 2024, Anil Kumar Jaiswal and others vs. State of U.P. and others and this Court had disposed of the petition by giving benefit of judgment rendered in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. Later on, the victim died during the treatment.

4. We have gone through the F.I.R., which discloses a cognizable offence. In fact, the victim has also died. If any evidence which the petitioner possesses regarding his innocence is available, he is free to approach the concerned Magistrate.

5. This Court finds no good ground to grant a prayer as made in the writ petition.

6. The writ petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.2.2024

A.Dewal