Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 198373 (ALL)

SMT. SANJU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/10757/2025 · 2025-11-15

Abdul Moin, Babita Rani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10757 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents. 2. Instant petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents specially respondent no.2 to fairly investigate the FIR registered vide Case Crime No.507 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 326(F) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner tried to lodge the FIR on account of her house having been burnt by certain persons yet the FIR has been lodged under the provisions of BNS, 2023 which carry punishment less than seven years and that the respondent authorities are not investigating the matter properly. 4. Responding, learned AGA points out on the basis of instructions sent by Sri Ashutosh Kharwar, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich, dated 14.11.2025 that a charge sheet has been prepared on 10.11.2025 and sent to the supervisory authority. He further states that statement of the independent witness has been taken per which it is not the house of the petitioner which has been burnt rather it is 'Madha' which has been burnt. 5. The same is refuted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by contending that once the respondent authorities have not lodged the FIR under the provisions of BNS which pertain to the accused having burnt Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gyan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Smt. Sanju .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) his house rather they have diluted the section to make it out one in which her 'Madha' has been burnt as such he has no option but to approach this Court. 6. Considering the aforesaid, once a charge sheet has been submitted before the supervisory authority as such the petitioner would have adequate remedy of approaching the supervisory authority by means of an application indicating the aforesaid. In case an application is filed the supervisory authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. November 15, 2025 A. Katiyar CRLP No. 10757 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench