Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 164673 (ALL)

SMT. INDUBALA CHAUDHARY v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME U.P. LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/8729/2025 · 2025-10-10

Abdul Moin, Pramod Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8729 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondents no.1 to 4. In view of the proposed order notice to respondent no.5 is dispensed with. The instant petition has been filed praying for a writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent nos.1 to 3 to direct respondent no.4 (the investigating authority) to conduct a proper and impartial investigation into the already registered FIR dated 14-12-2024 and the associated Case Crime No. 329 of 2024, and to complete the investigation within a stipulated time. The petition further seeks a direction to arrest the accused named in the case crime and to ensure the protection of the life of the petitioner and her son by respondent nos. 1 to 3. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others - (2008) 2 SCC 409 has held that if a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered or having been registered proper investigation is not being done then the remedy to the aggrieved person is not to go the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution but to approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. now Section175(3) of B.N.S.S., 2023. The same principle has been approved and reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Subramaniam and Another vs. S. Janaki and Another, reported in (2020) 16 SCC 728. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate. In case the said application is filed the learned Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law. October 10, 2025 Haseen U. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Smt. Indubala Chaudhary .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- HASEENUDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench