Allahabad High Court
CRLP/9132/2025 of CHHEDU Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 17 November 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9132 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. List of fresh cases is revised. 2. None appears for the petitioner to press this petition even in the revised call. 3. As such, the Court has gone
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9132 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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. List of fresh cases is revised.
2. None appears for the petitioner to press this petition even in the revised call.
3. As such, the Court has gone through the file with the assistance of learned AGA as well as Sri Amit Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.
4. This petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 to lodge the First Information Report in appropriate sections against the opposite party No.4 and also take legal action against the opposite party No.4. Further prayer is for a mandamus commanding the opposite party No.2 to take action against the opposite party No.3 for disobedience of his mandatory legal duty.
5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others - (2008) 2 SCC 409 has held that if a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered or having been registered proper investigation is not being done then the remedy to the aggrieved person is not to go the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution but to approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. (now under relevant provisions of B.N.S.S., 2023). The same principle has been approved and reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bare Lal Bhartiya Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Amit Tripathi Chhedu .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
Subramaniam and Another vs. S. Janaki and Another, reported in (2020) 16 SCC 728.
6. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate. In case the said application is filed, the learned Magistrate shall proceed in accordance with law. November 17, 2025 Reena/- CRLP No. 9132 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench