Allahabad High Court
CRLP/16803/2026 of NEELAM MISHRA Vs THE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 16 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16803 of 2026 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16803 of 2026
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to either investigated proper and fair or transfer to another investigating officer for proper and fair investigation in Case crime No. 0408 of 2025, under Section 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2) BNS & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi and conclude investigation within a specific period in the interest of justice (Annexure no.1 to this writ petition).
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to investigated proper and fair, effect of arrest of the co-accused persons in Case crime No. 0408 of 2025, under Section 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2) BNS & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi."
2. Mr. Kshitij Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted and apprised the Court that after completion of the statutory investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet and thereupon cognizance has already been taken by the concerned court.
3. Learned AGA appearing for the State-respondents does not dispute the aforesaid facts.
4. Heard Mr. Kshitij Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Pandey, R.V. Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Neelam Mishra .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
Satyendra Nath Tiwari, learned AGA appearing for the State-respondents.
5. Taking into consideration the statement given by the learned counsel for the petitioner and no objection by the learned AGA as well as the fact that after completion of the investigation, Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet and thereupon cognizance has already been taken by the concerned court, therefore, we do not find any reason to keep the matter pending for further adjudication.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. September 17, 2026 Prajapati RK CRLP No. 16803 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad