HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8767 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Girijesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite parties. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, the notice to opposite party No.5 is hereby dispensed with. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(A) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/ order directing to transfer of ongoing investigation into the First Information Report bearing Case Crime No.324 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 306, 352, 351(3) & 64(2)M of B.N.S., Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow to another independent Police Station or Investigating Agency free from influence of the accused in the light of Rhea Chakraborty vs. State of Bihar [(2021) 3 SCC 1]. (B) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the concerned Judicial Magistrate ACJM-5 to monitor the ongoing investigation into the First Information Report bearing Case Crime No.324 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 306, 352, 351(3) & 64(2) of B.N.S., Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow periodically and call for a report on the progress of investigation once every fortnight to ensure Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Saurabh Tiwari, Gaurav Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Syed Ruhi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) timely and fair inquiry in the light of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2007)." 4. Sri Dwivedi has produced a copy of the instructions letter dated 16.09.2025 provided by Sri Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Inspector, Police Station-Thakurganj, Commissionerate Lucknow addressing to the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Lucknow. The same is taken on record. 5. As per the aforesaid instructions, the investigation has been completed and the final report has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the investigation has not been conducted properly inasmuch as the credible evidence and material has not been considered by the Investigating Officer. 7. Be that as it may, if final report has been filed in the present case, the petitioner or any other aggrieved person may file the protest application against the final report. 8. Not only the above, if the final report has not been sent to the Court, the petitioner may file application before the Supervisory Authority against that final report taking all pleas and ground which are available with her, and before sending such final report to the Court, the contentions of the petitioner or other aggrieved persons may be considered by the Supervisory Authority, strictly in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally. September 26, 2025 Suresh/ CRLP No. 8767 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench