HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22748 of 2025 Court No. - 45 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J. 1. Heard Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State, Shri Brijesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.3, Shri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.5- C.B.I. and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following reliefs :- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 4 & 5 to further investigate the matter in fair and proper manner, so that justice may be done. (ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to any independent agency to further investigating the matter of the petitioners in fair and proper manner, otherwise the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. (iii). Issue any other writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the present case. (iv). Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner." 3. At the very outset, learned AGA has pointed out that in the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : Brijesh Kumar Pandey, G.A., Rahul Srivastava Julfiqar And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) instant case, investigation has already been concluded and the charge-sheet has also been submitted against the petitioners, who are the accused in the instant case and even, cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate, who is seisin of the proceedings against the petitioners. 4. Learned AGA has next submitted that in the said backdrop of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners is wholly misconceived and against the settled principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bahatie Devi (Dead) Through Legal Representatives Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2023) 16 SCC 349. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.5 has also adopted the same arguments, however, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since the investigation has not been concluded in a fair manner, therefore, he is entitled for further investigation of the case by C.B.I. or any other investigating agency. 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that investigation in the instant case has already been concluded and a charge-sheet has also been submitted against the petitioners, who are the accused in the instant case and even, cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate, who is in seisin of the proceedings pending against the accused-petitioners and in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bahatie Devi (Supra), the instant writ petition is wholly misconceived and against the settled principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court. 7. In view thereof, the instant writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. October 14, 2025 Nadim CRLP No. 22748 of 2025 2 (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NADIM ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- NADIM ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad