Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Dukhana Devi v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 13820 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20690 (7 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).


 (Court no. 48)

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition  No.   13820  of 2006

Dukhana Devi W/o late  Chhotey Lal,

R/o Village Bandgohana Khurd,

Police Station Kaundhiyara,

District Allahabad. ....  ...... Petitioner/Applicant.


1. State of U.P.

2. Station Officer,  Police Station Kaundhiyara,

District Allahabad.

3. Shailendra Kumar son of Amar Bahadur.

4. Amar Bahadur .

5. Virendra Kumar son of Amar Bahadur

All R/o Village Chakpurey Miya Khurd,

Police Station Industrial Area

District  Allahabad...... Respondents.


Hon'ble Barkat Ali Zaidi, J

1. In  a matter relating to an offence under Section 498-A, the Magistrate passed an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. that the case be registered as a complaint case.

2. The grouse of the petitioner  under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is that the Magistrate should have directed the police  to investigate the case, and the case should have been registered as a police case.  A revision on this ground before the Sessions Judge had earlier been dismissed.

3. I have heard  Sri Rakesh Prasad counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S. Maurya Addl. Government  for the State.

4. The Law on this subject has already been clarified elaborately  in the case of  Masuriyadin alias Nate and others Vs. Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad 2002(44) ,A.C.C. 248.

5. None of these pre-requisites which may  justify the registration of a case as a police case, are available here.  No Forensic Examination by a medical or Ballistic Expert, or any other, of that kind is needed here, about which it may be said that it will be difficult for the complainant to procure such evidence. No recovery is also to be made for which police help may be needed.

6. The counsel for the petitioner argued that in case the matter is registered as a complaint, the complainant will have to bear the cost of summoning the witnesses  and other expenses, which will  be an  unjust burden on the complainant. The argument is too shallow to become acceptable.

7. The mere fact that the petitioner will have to spend some money in the conduct of her case is not a justifiable ground for issuing a direction, about a case being registered as a police case.  Even the amount which the complainant will have to spend, cannot be deemed to be so exorbitant, as to cause  concern, to the petitioner.

8. The counsel for the petitioner has referred to following cases:-

(i) (2001(1) JIC 942 (All) 1)  Dinesh Chandra & others Vs. State of U.P.

(ii) (2003 (47) ACC,140)  Ram Anuj  Dubey Vs. State of U.P.

(iii) 2001 Crl.L.J.3363 Ram Babu Gupta and another Vs. State of U.P. & others.

9. None of these cases is relevant for the purposes of the present case, and they deal, with entirely different matters.

10. The argument of expenditure in the case propounded by the counsel for the petitioner  finds no echo in any of the aforesaid cases.

11. Petition dismissed.  

Dt:    7TH December, 2006

  13820 /06n.u.


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


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 |

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