Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24691 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sudhir Kumar Alias Sudhir Singh Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Singh Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Heard the petitioner, who appears in person and Shri Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has come to this Court with the following prayer :
"i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents no. 3 and 4 to lodge the first information report under Section 307, 504, 506, 323 I.P.C. against the accused/respondent no.5 to 8 at Police Station-Maudarwaja, District-Farrukhabad.
ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1, 2 and 3 to give police protection to protect personal life and liberty and property of the petitioners and their family members.
iii) to issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
iv) to award the costs of this writ petition to the petitioners."
The petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of
U.P. and others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1 by which it has been held that lodging of an F.I.R. is a fundamental right.
It is to be noted that in case the police authority is not lodging an F.I.R., the petitioner is not remedy less, he can straightaway approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. So far as second prayer is concerned, if there is any personal danger to the petitioner, it is always open for him to go to the District Level Security Committee which can consider the threat perception of the petitioner. For the aforesaid prayer writ cannot be issued.
The writ petition is misconceived and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 Sunil Kr. Gupta (Shashi Kant, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya, J.)