Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24019 (ALL)

SONU v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

CRLP/4096/2025 · 2025-03-04

Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Prashant Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30980-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4096 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sonu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ulajhan Singh Bind Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State-respondents and Shri Abhishek Mishra, learned counsel who has entered his appearance on behalf of the informant - respondent Nos.4 and 5. 2. This writ petition is preferred praying for the following principal relief: "i. TO ISSUE a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent police authority. to consider the case of Petitioner and take appropriate legal action against the Respondent No.4 and 5 on the representation dated 7.2.2025 given by. the wife of Petitioner against the Respondent No.4 and 5. ii TO ISSUE a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent police authority to decide the representation dated 7.2.2025 as well as investigate the IGRS No.40014425002075 dated 9.2.2025 fairly within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble High Court." 3. In pith and substance, the petitioner’s grievance is that despite the representation, till date the first information report of the peitioner has not been lodged whereas the first information report of respondent Nos.4 and 5 has been lodged on a different incident. 4. Learned counsel for the informant has raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the instant writ petition and contends that the present proceedings have been initiated as an afterthought. He further states that if the petitioner is inclined to get the first information report registered, the appropriate remedy is to move an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C./175(3) B.N.S.S. 5. Considering the relief pressed before us, no positive direction for lodging an FIR is issued. However, it is open to the petitioner to move an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C./175(3) B.N.S.S. 6. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Order Date :- 5.3.2025/NLY Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad