Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 77197 (ALL)

MOHD. SALEEM v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/23428/2025 · 2025-07-21

Manoj Kumar Gupta, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119124-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23428 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohd. Saleem Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Chakraborty Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for respondents no. 1 to 3. 2. The following prayers have been made in the writ petition: (i). a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondent nos. 1 & 2 to inquire into the matter seriously against the illegal and arbitrary activities of the respondent no. 3 and initiate disciplinary & departmental action for dereliction of his duties and committing offences of illegally demanding ransom by misusing his official position as Station House Officer. (ii). a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondent nos. 1 & 2 to look into the seriousness of the petitioner's plight so as to decide the representations / grievances of the petitioner contained in the Annexure nos. 7, 8 and 9 to this writ petition. 3. It is alleged that respondent no. 3, who is police officer, is demanding illegal gratification from the petitioner for showing favour in discharge of his official functions. He is also subjecting the petitioner to harassment. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner during course of arguments admits that the petitioner has already filed a complaint before the Human Rights Commission. He does not dispute that the petitioner has remedy of initiating criminal action against respondent no. 3 in case any illegal gratification has been demanded from him. 5. In view of the aforesaid, in exercise of writ jurisdiction, we are not inclined to issue any positive direction but leave it open to the petitioner to initiate action against the respondent no. 3 as permissible under law. 6. In respect of grievance regarding harassment by respondent no. 3, we leave it open to the petitioner to approach respondent no. 2 by means of a fresh representation so that he may examine the same in accordance with law. 7. The petition stands disposed of. . (R.M.N. Mishra, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Dhirendra/ Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad