SUMAN KUMAR RAGHAV @ SUMAN KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/25384/2025 · 2025-09-15
Prakash Padia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 80408 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 80408 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 25384 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the present petition with the following prayers:- I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the District Magistrate, Mandal Meerut, District Bulandshahr (respondent no.2) to expeditiously adjudicate and finally decide the Case No.5056 of 2024, State Vs. Ravindra Kumar Sharma, under Section 17(3) of the Arms Act, 1959, within a stipulated time period.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the U.P. State Bar Council at Allahabad (respondent no.3) to consider and take appropriate action upon the complaint dated 17.07.2025 as preferred by the petitioner in terms of Section 35 of The Advocates Act, 1961.
2. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, Instructions dated 21.08.2025 received under the signatures of respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Bulandshahar placed before the Court, same is taken on record and copy of the same has also Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ambleshwar Pandey, Anuj Srivastava, Devaang Savla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Hemant Sharma, Santosh Kumar Rai, Ashok Kumar Tiwari, C.S.C. Suman Kumar Raghav @ Suman Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
been provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. After going through the aforesaid Instructions, the Court is of the opinion that insofar as the prayer No.1 is concerned, the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Bulandshahar has taken a decision in the matter on 06.08.2025, therefore, no further order is required to pass in the matter and the present petition has now become infructuous only in respect of prayer No.1.
4. Insofar as the prayer No.2 is concerned, the Court is of the opinion that he has no jurisdiction to pass any order and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance as has been raised in prayer No.2. (Prakash Padia,J.) September 16, 2025 saqlain WRIC No. 25384 of 2025 2
Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad