Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Ranjna vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 September, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31630 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ranjna Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anmol Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Anmol Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State.
2. This is a thoroughly misconceived and ill advised petition. The same ought not to have been filed.
3. The relief prayed for in the present writ petition is reproduced hereinunder: " Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 and 4 to take suitable action against the ancestral family member of the petitioenr by deciding the representation of the petitioner dated 31.07.2019 (Annexure No.5 to the writ petition) within specific period as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
4. We couldnot understand as to how respondents 3 and 4 i.e. Additional Director General of Police, Kanpur Zone, Kanpur Nagar and Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur Nagar can be directed by this Court to take action against ancestral family members of petitioner as mentioned in application dated 31.07.2019 (Annexure-5 to writ petition).
5. In reply to the question as to what is meant by ancestral family member, learned counsel for petitioner submits that directions be issued to respondent nos.3 and 4 to decide the representation made by petitioner.
6. We have also gone through the representation dated 31.07.2019, and find that allegation has been made against private persons to the effect that petitioner has been abused and detained by them. If that be so remedy lies to petitioner to file first information report against such persons and if police does not take any action then remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C.
by moving an application before concerned Magistrate for getting the FIR registered.
7. We do not find any occasion to issue mandamus as prayed for.
5. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Ashish Pd.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ranjna vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 September, 2019
Judges
  • Sudhir Agarwal
Advocates
  • Anmol Tiwari