SMT. VINEETA SINGH AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND OTHERS
CRLP/2424/2024 · 2025-10-28
Rajnish Kumar, Zafeer Ahmad
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 202512 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 202512 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2424 of 2024 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.
1. Case called out. 2. No one is present on behalf of the parties to press this petition nor any request for adjournment or pass over has been made whereas learned A.G.A. for the State is present. 3. The following order was passed on 05.04.2024:-
"Petitioners approach this Court seeking following relief: i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 08.03.2024 bearing FIR No.81/2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Wazirganj, District Lucknow. ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioners in aforesaid case during pendency of the investigation. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner No.1 is the wife of deceased Bharat Singh Mehar and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Srivastava, Vinay Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Bhupendra Nath Tripathi, Devesh Deo Bhatt, Mohammad Irfan Siddiqui, Sarvesh Kumar, Vaibhav Pandey Smt. Vineeta Singh And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
petitioner No.2 is the son of deceased Bharat Singh Mehar, who was original owner of the property in question. There is no allegation that the informant has any concern with the said property. Further allegation is with regard to a Revision filed in the Revenue court after five days of death of her husband/ his father in which name of the deceased father was wrongly mentioned by the lawyer, which was a bonafide mistake. Case for consideration is made out. Issue notice to respondent no.3 returnable within four weeks. Let pleading be exchanged within four weeks. List thereafter. Considering the submission made, it is provided that the petitioners shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless and until there is sufficient and cogent evidence available against them regarding commission of the offence. They shall get their statement recorded before the Police as and when they are called. If they do not do so, then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order. "
4.
Learned A.G.A., on the basis of telephonic instructions, submits that in this matter Charge Sheet has been forwarded in the Court on 06.08.2025, therefore, this petition has lost efficacy. 5. Dismissed accordingly. 6. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. October 28, 2025 Saurabh CRLP No. 2424 of 2024 2 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench