Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 185546 (ALL)

SUMAN KUMAR v. SRI SHASANK TIRPATHI DISTT. MAGISTRATE BARABANKI AND 3 OTHERS

CAPL/2004/2025 · 2025-10-30

Manish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2004 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. Heard. Present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non-compliance of the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court dated 22.04.2024 in Writ C No. 3574 of 2024. The relevant extracts of the said judgment and order is to be reproduced hereinbelow:- "6. The counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the fact that the ADO (Panchayat), Pure Dalai, Barabanki did not have jurisdiction to issue such certificate in respect of death which had occurred in district Ayodhya, therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. 7. The petitioner can always apply to the concerned Registrar of the area where the death of his father as claimed by the petitioner has taken place. If he applies, the same shall be considered as per law. If he has any other remedy, he can avail the same." Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received from respondent no. 1 has submitted that the respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the Death Certificate of the father of the applicant as father of the applicant has expired in Ayodhya. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the father of the applicant was a permanent resident of district Barabanki so the Death Certificate should be issued by the concerned authority in Barabanki district, hence, by not issuing the same, the respondent no. 1 is intentionally disobeying the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jaleel Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Suman Kumar .....Applicant(s) Sri Shasank Tirpathi Distt. Magistrate Barabanki And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, learned Standing Counsel and going through the record of the case, it is found that claim of the applicant regarding issuance of death certificate of his father from district Barabanki had already been considered and eventually not accepted by the Court as the counsel for the petitioner could not dispute that the ADO (Panchaayt), Pure Dalai, Barabanki did not have jurisdiction to issue such certificate, however the Writ Court had given liberty to the applicant to apply for the death certificate before the concerned Registrar of the area where the death of his father has occured as claimed by the applicant. On being asked from learned counsel for the applicant whether he had applied before the concerned authority in Ayodhya District, he has replied that till date the applicant has not applied before the concerned authority of Ayodhya, as directed by the Writ Court, hence, there is no wilful disobedience or defiance of the judgment and order of the Writ Court by respondents. In view of the aforesaid, the present contempt application is misconceived and is hereby dismissed. October 30, 2025 Ashish CAPL No. 2004 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench