Ajeet Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9590 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ajeet Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ambuj Singh,Nritika Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA who appears on behalf of State-respondents and perused the record. This petition has been filed praying the following main reliefs:- A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the opposite party no. 1 to 3 to investigate the matter fairly relating to the FIR which was registered as Case crime No. 026/2023 under section 420 of 1.P.C., Police Station-Naka Hindola, District-Lucknow. B. to be enquired into by any other competent authority (CIBI, CBCID) or by constituting An SIT (special investigation team) including a senior police officer designated by the concerned commissioner of Police and state commissioner for person with disabilities UP who is to furnish a police report pursuant to investigation within a period of Three months from the date of which such officer is appointed to undertake such investigation. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that although the F.I.R. was lodged by the petitioner on

13.2.2023 but the Investigating Officer is conducting a fair investigation and he is in collusion with the opposite parties. We have perused the averments made in the writ petition and are not convinced that any direction, as has been prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition, can be granted in these proceedings. The Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and others, reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 relying upon an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. and others, reported in (2008) 2 SCC 469 has held that this Court normally should not entertain such petitions for the reason that complainant in such situations is at liberty to avail the alternative remedy by approaching the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Accordingly, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition, which is hereby disposed of with the observation that it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned by moving an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. If any such application is moved by the petitioner/complainant, the same shall be dealt in accordance with law by the Magistrate concerned. Order Date :- 19.12.2023 Anuj Singh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench