Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. PANNA DEVI versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Panna Devi v. State Of U.P. & Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 15042 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 21052 (13 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

COURT NO. 45

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT  PETITION NO. 15042 OF 2006

Smt Panna Devi..........................................Petitioner.

                                         Versus

State of U.P and others ..............................Respondents.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner on 13.9.2006 alleging that the contesting opposite party was only 20 years 7 months and 17days old on the date when the election of Block Pramukh was notified, whereas age was liable to be 21 years.  As a result of which, the contesting respondent committed an offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 472 I.P.C.  The Magistrate rejected the application vide order dated 21.11.2006 coming to a conclusion that no cognizable offence appears to have been committed. The election in favour of the contesting respondent has been challenged before the District Magistrate and the election petition is pending. This order was challenged in criminal revision. The revisional court dismissed the revision in limine on 23.11.2006.  Both the orders are impugned in the instant writ petition.

Reliance has been placed on a number decisions of this Court Ram Kumar Gautam Vs. State of U.P. and others 2006 (55) ACC 763, Sukhveer Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2006 (55) ACC 889, Razia Begum Vs. State of U.P. and another 2006 Prayag Nirnay Prakashika (Crl.) 478, Maha Mandaleshwar Swami Vs. State of U.P. 2006 Prayag Nirnay Prakashika (Crl.) 428, Balwant Vs. State of U.P. 2006 Prayag Nirnay Prakashika (Crl.) 475 .

I have gone through the entire judgments and the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., allegations are same on which the election of the respondent no.3 has been challenged. It is apparent that the Magistrate after looking into the allegations and considering the argument, arrived at a definite conclusion that no cognizable offence is made out.  In the circumstances, I do not find any merit in the instant case. There is no illegality in the orders challenged in the instant writ petition. The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dt. 13.12.2006

Rkg


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.