Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DWARIKA NATH DUBEY versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dwarika Nath Dubey v. State Of U.P. And Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 14 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 9784 (18 May 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.14 of 2005

Dwarika Nath Dubey                           .....                   Petitioner

Vs

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

   : Present :

(Hon'ble Mr.Justice Amitava Lala & Hon'ble Mr.Justice Shiv Shanker )

   : Appearance:

For the Petitioner                                  ....   Sri Piyush Mishra

For the Respondents                             ....   Sri Niraj Kant Verma, A.G.A.

Amitava Lala,J- The writ petition has been made on 6th December,2006 challenging the First Information Report dated 1st November,2002.  A Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 5th January, 2005 granted liberty to the petitioner to file supplementary affidavit explaining the delay.  But in spite of the same we see from the affidavit that there is no explanation about the delay.  The petitioner only wanted to develop his case by filing such supplementary affidavit.  More over the statement of the paragraph 8 of the supplementary affidavit to the extent that the department could not find fault from the service record is totally against the decision taken by the employer imposing minor punishment upon him.  Mere deposit of the amount of Rs.1,30,000/- cannot remove the criminal Act at this stage and in the present circumstances.

We do not find any reason to interfere with the case and hold that the police is harassing.  We do not find any cogent reason in the writ petition or in the supplementary affidavit why after so many years of  lodging the F.I.R. the police will harass.

Under such circumstances, we cannot interfere in the writ petition.  The writ petition stands dismissed.  Interim order, if any, stands vacated.  No order is passed as to costs.

   ( Justice Amitava Lala )  

I agree.

( Justice Shiv Shanker)

Dt.18.5.06

PKB

Crl.14-05


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.