Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MADAN BHAIYA versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Madan Bhaiya v. State Of U.P. & Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 3122 of 2002 [2006] RD-AH 8060 (20 April 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.3

Criminal Misc.Writ Petition No. 3122 of 2002

Madan Bhaiya                              .....                          Petitioner.

  Vs

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

         : Present :

     ( Hon'ble Mr.Justice Amitava Lala & Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.N.Misra )

         : Appearance :

For the Petitioner                            .....  Sri H.C.Mishra

For the Respondents                       .....  Sri Sudhir Mehrotra

  Sri Neeraj Kant Verma,A.G.A.

Amitava Lala,J-  It appears that the petitioner has made a prayer directing the police authority of District Ghaziabad to investigate the matter and further directing Police Station Gokulpurvi, District Uttar Purvi Delhi not to investigate the Case Crime no.334 of 2001 under Sections 364,302, 34, I.P.C.  These issues are not very much germane for due consideration since the petitioner himself made a prayer for transferring the investigation to an independent agency like C.B.C.I.D. by deleting the name of C.B.I.  However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4 contended that in his copy he is asking transfer of the investigation of the matter to C.B.I.   We have checked up the copy and found that the statement of the learned counsel is absolutely correct.  Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also contended  that one of the relative of the complainant has already filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court for the purpose of transferring the investigation to C.B.I.   It has also contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the concerned Bench of the Delhi High Court called for the record of the previous case being numbered as Writ Petition No.205 of 2002 wherein the petitioner hereunder had made an impleadment application suppressing the fact that the writ petition has been filed herein.  Under such circumstances we do not find any reason to keep the writ petition pending unnecessarily. It will lead to multiplicity of the proceedings.  There is no occasion to continue that the order of stay which has been granted earlier as an interim order by a Bench of this Court.  Hence the writ petition stands dismissed in view of the above observation.   Interim order stands vacated.  No order is passed as to costs.

  ( Justice Amitava Lala )

     I agree.

( Justice R.N.Misra )

Dt.20.4.06

PKB

Crl. 3122/02


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.