Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195511 (ALL)

MISHRI LAL AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

CRLP/8625/2023 · 2025-10-27

Rajnish Kumar, Zafeer Ahmad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8625 of 2023 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J. 1. Heard Shri Ambrish Singh Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and Shri Abhishek Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no.4. 2. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing FIR No.0445 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Sandila, District Hardoi. 3. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of short counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State annexing a copy of final report, submits that the petition has lost its efficacy, as, after investigation, final report dated 10.03.2025 has been submitted in the case, which has been forwarded to the Court concerned on 19.03.2025. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondent no.4 submits that though Investigating Officer has submitted the final report but it has been submitted with the collusion of the petitioners, as, initially charge-sheet was filed against two persons and feeling aggrieved by the same, respondent no. 4 had submitted an application before the Superintendent of Police, Hardoi. Considering the same, further investigation was directed by the Superintendent of Police, Hardoi. Now final report has been submitted. He also submits that respondent no.4 has also preferred an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for fair investigation in the matter but during pendency of the said application, final report has been submitted. 5. Be that as it may, since final report has been submitted before the Court concerned on 19.03.2005, this petition has lost its efficacy. The Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ambrish Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Abhishek Singh, Krishan Prajapathi Mishri Lal And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow And Others .....Respondent(s) respondent no.4 is having remedy to assail the final report in accordance with law. 6. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. October 27, 2025 Ajit CRLP No. 8625 of 2023 2 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench