HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32479 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent no.2 to take legal action against the respondent no.3 by considering the inquiry of S.D.M. Nagina, Bijnor. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of direction to the respondent no.2 to decide the representation 14.08.2025 expeditiously. iii. Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case." 3. The petitioner is only a complainant and not an aggrieved person. The settled law is that a writ petition can be maintained only by a person whose legal rights have been infringed. A stranger or a mere complainant, who is not directly affected, has no locus to challenge such an order. 4. In Jasbhai Motibhai Desai Vs. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashir Ahmed & Ors., (1976) 1 SCC 671, the Apex Court held that a person who is not an aggrieved party cannot maintain a writ petition unless he demonstrates infringement of a legally enforceable right. The principle has been reiterated in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2013) 4 SCC 465, wherein it was held that only a person who suffers a legal injury can invoke the writ jurisdiction. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Kumar Gautam Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Omprakash Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgment of this Court in Smt. Anita Kumari Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., 2021 (5) ADJ 470, wherein this Court has held that "a stranger to the proceedings, who is not affected directly or whose legal rights are not infringed, cannot maintain a writ petition merely on the basis of being a complainant." 6. In the present case, the petitioner has no enforceable right to pray for a direction upon respondent no.2 to take legal action against the respondent no.3 as none of his rights are infringed. 7. In view of the aforesaid legal position, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. October 8, 2025 Sattyarth WRIC No. 32479 of 2025 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad