Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 137933 (ALL)

MRINALINI SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA THRU. SECY. MINISTERY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI AND 7 OTHERS

WRIC/4246/2025 · 2025-05-07

Om Prakash Shukla, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26592-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4246 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mrinalini Singh Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministery Of Home Affairs New Delhi And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vishwanath Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Namit Sharma,Rohit Tripathi,Shiv P. Shukla Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. Sri Shailendra Singh Chauhan, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of opp. party Nos. 5 and 7 by filing his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also Sri Shiv P. Shukla, learned counsel for the opp. party No. 2 and Sri Shailendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the opp. party Nos. 5 and 7 and perused the record. The petitioner prays for the following main reliefs: "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opp. parties concerned to make the entry of name of petitioner relating to properties of ancestor of her husband namely Sarabjeet Singh which is recorded in year 1862 in the concerned records relating to land Khasra no. 286, 287, 288, 382, situated at Mohalla Khas Bazar, Station Ganesh Ganj, City and District Lucknow now known as 1 B.N. road, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow, thereon Indira Gandhi Eye hospital and other constructions are made, in the interest of justice. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opp. parties concerned to decide the application of the petitioner dated 21.08.2024 in the interest of justice." After hearing the parties what comes out is that the property in question is to be provisionally attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. Even otherwise, relief prayed for cannot be considered under Article 226. The petitioner may avail other remedies, if permissible in law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 7.5.2025/A.Nigam Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench