Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHOK KUMAR versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ashok Kumar v. State Of U.P. And Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 14243 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20610 (6 December 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. Sushil Harkauli,J

Hon. Pankaj Mithal,J

It is alleged in the FIR initially lodged at Ghaziabad that the petitioner who is in the police service of Delhi, along with some others abducted the two victims in a Car from Ghaziabad took them to Delhi and killed those two deceased persons in an alleged encounter in Delhi. The FIR was lodged under sections 302 and 364 IPC i.e., abduction and murder. The investigation has been transferred from Ghaziabad  to the Delhi Police.

The petitioner is named accused in the FIR. He has filed this writ petition with the prayer that the investigation regarding abduction should be transferred from Delhi Police to Ghaziabad Police and investigation  by the Delhi Police should be stayed.

Firstly the forum of investigation is not something in which the accused can have such a vital interest as to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Moreover, we are not able to agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the two offences under sections 302 and 364 IPC should be investigated separately because the abduction "started" in Ghaziabad while the alleged murder took place in Delhi. It is one single transaction of abduction for the purpose of murder and separate investigation would cause serious prejudice to the investigation and prosecution. Moreover, when several offences form part of one transaction they can be investigated by the police of one place. Apparently, abduction was for the purpose of murder and therefore the dominant offence is the murder for which the Delhi Police have jurisdiction.  The two decisions relied upon by the learned  counsel for the petitioner namely Upkar Singh Vs. Ved Prakash and others  2005 SCC (Crl) 211 and the unreported decision dated 21.11.2005 in writ petition No. 1150 of 2005 Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P., will not apply in this case,  in view of what has been stated above. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

6.12.2006

SKS(14243-06)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.