Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10116 (ALL)

SMT BALI BAAJ v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/1422/2025 · 2025-01-23

Nand Prabha Shukla, Vivek Kumar Birla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11984-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1422 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt Bali Baaj Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gyan Prakash Mishra,Santosh Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vijendra Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue ad-interim mandamus directing the respondents to ensure the free and fair investigation of the case in pursuance of first information report dated 30.07.2024 registered as Crime No. 430 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 IPC, Police Station-Atrauli, District- Aligarh. 3. The petitioner has admittedly approached this Court by filing writ petition praying for similar relief which was disposed of vide order dated 21.10.2024 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 18085 of 2024 (Smt. Bali Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others) which is quoted as under: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents. 2. Present petition has been filed seeking direction to respondents to ensure fair, impartial and proper investigation of the Case Crime No.430 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for issuance of suitable direction for fair and impartial investigation. 4. Learned A.G.A. submits that the police authorities are under the obligation to do the investigation fairly, impartially and expeditiously and the same would be done in accordance with law. 5. The present petition is disposed of directing the police authorities to conclude the investigation of the said case fairly, impartially and expeditiously, in the supervision of Superintendent of Police concerned, preferably within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before them. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the Competent Authority/Investigating Officer to act in accordance with law." 4. It is further submitted that when the aforesaid order is not complied with the petitioner while Contempt Application (Civil) No. 7954 of 2024 (Smt. Bali Vs. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar and 2 Others) which was dismissed vide order dated 03.01.2025 which is quoted as under: "From the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application, no disobedience of the order of this Court can be imputed to the opposite parties. The applicant may approach the concerned Magistrate or exercise any other remedy available to her in law. It is not a case for instituting proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 before this Court. The application is dismissed." 5. Learned A.G.A. submits that in the present case, the final report had already been submitted on 11.09.2024 i.e. even before the passing of the order dated 21.10.2024 in the earlier petition as quoted above. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly admitted that in the earlier petition forwarding of the final report dated 11.09.2024 has not been disclosed as apparently the petitioner was not aware of the forwarding of such final report. 7. We, therefore, find that for the same relief the second petition is not maintainable. Even otherwise, the petitioner has effective remedy. 8. Needless to say that in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by filing of the final report, he has effective statutory remedy and, in case, the investigation is still pending although it is not reflected from the instructions placed on record by learned A.G.A., the petitioner is at liberty to avail the effective remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the concerned Magistrate. 9. We, therefore, do not find any good ground to entertain the petition, hence, the present petition is not maintainable. 10. The instant petition stands accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Shivani Digitally signed by :- SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad