Allahabad High Court
Smt. Jarina Alias Shakeena Alias Sabiya vs State Of U.P Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home ... on 1 July, 2022
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4417 of 2022 Petitioner :- Smt. Jarina Alias Shakeena Alias Sabiya Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Himanshu Suryavanshi,Niteesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
Heard Shri Niteesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents no.1, 2 and 3 and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner - Smt. Jarina Alias Shakeena Alias Sabiya with the following prayers :-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned first information report lodged by the opposite party no.4 on 09.10.2019, vide registered as FIR No.0575 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 354, 352, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2) 5A of SC/ST Act at Police Wazirganj, District Lucknow Gramin and subsequently Sections 467, 468, 471, 352 I.P.C. has been omitted an Section 323, 448 I.P.C. was added in case crime no.575 of 2019 of the said FIR and presently the investigation is pending under sections 406, 419, 420, 323, 120-B, 354, 504, 506, 448 I.P.C. and 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2)5A of SC/ST Act in the said case crime number against the petitioner and FIR is annexed as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no.1, 2 and 3 not to arrest or adopt any coercive measures against the petitioner on the basis of first information report lodged by the opposite party no.4, under Section 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 354, 352, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2)5A of SC/ST Act, mentioned in First Information Report No.0575 of 2019 at Police Station - Wazirganj, District Lucknow Gramin, and subsequently sections 467, 468, 471, 352 I.P.C. has been omitted and section 323, 448 I.P.C. have been added in case crime no.575 of 2019 of the said FIR and police is presently trying to arrest the petitioner in sections 406, 419, 420, 323, 120-B, 354, 504, 506, 448 I.P.C. and 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2)5A SC/ST Act in case crime no.575 of 2019."
Learned A.G.A. for the State has submitted that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.16396 (M/B) of 2021 with the following prayers :-
"(a) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 09.10.2019 bearing FIR No.0575 of 2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 120-B, 504, 352, 506, 323, 441 I.P.C. and 3(1)(da)(dha) and 325A of SC/ST Act and Section 400, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow lodged by the complainant/opposite party no.4, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition.
(b) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby direct to the Opposite parties No.1 to 3 not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report dated 09.10.2019 bearing FIR No.0575/2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 120-B, 504, 352, 506, 323, 441 I.P.C. and 3(1)(da)(dha) and 325A of SC/ST Act and Section 400, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow lodged by the complainant/opposite party No.4, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition."
He further submitted that the aforesaid petition was dismissed by this Court comprising one of us and Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J. vide order dated 12.08.2021. He further submitted that the affidavit filed in both the petition was filed by the petitioner herself, who is aged about 84 years.
On a pointed query being made to the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding filing of second writ petition for the same cause of action, he could not give satisfactory reply.
In view of the aforesaid fact, this Court proposed to impose costs upon the petitioner to which learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered his unconditional apology and submitted that he will not repeat same type of mistake in future.
Looking to the unconditional apology made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not imposing costs on the petitioner giving warning to the petitioner as well as his counsel to be cautious in future and not to take judicial proceeding for granted.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed on this count alone that the present petition is the second writ petition for the same cause of action.
(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 1.7.2022 Anand Sri./-