Allahabad High Court
CRLP/10938/2025 of RAMENDRA VIKRAM SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS on 27 May 2025
No. - 2025:AHC:91856-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10938 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ramendra Vikram Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- J. N. Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil
Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10938 of 2025
Petitioner :- Ramendra Vikram SinghRespondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- J. N. DwivediCounsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,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. Heard Shri J.N. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Tejasvi Mishra,learned counsel for private respondents and learned AGA for State respondents.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondents toconsider the application of the petitioner and lodge FIR against private respondents.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for private respondents has raised anobjection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that forthe similar cause of action the petitioner has earlier preferred Writ-C No.12519 of2025 (Ramendra Vikram Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors.). The said writ petition wasgot dismissed as withdrawn on 25.4.2025 with liberty to pursue the remedy beforethe appropriate authority for redressal of grievances. As such it is contended thatonce for similar cause of action earlier writ petition was dismissed, the preferringof second writ petition for the same cause of action is an abuse of the process oflaw and liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances as well as perusing the record, we findsubstance in the objection raised by learned counsel for the private respondents.Once for similar cause of action earlier writ petition was got dismissed as withdrawwith liberty to pursue the remedy before the appropriate authority, the preferring ofinstant writ petition for the same cause of action is an abuse of the process of lawand the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. In view of above, we are not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition and thesame is accordingly dismissed.
(Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
Order Date :- 28.5.2025SP/