Allahabad High Court
Mohd Ameen @ Ullu vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 24 October, 2024
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:171177-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14762 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mohd Ameen @ Ullu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dev Prakash Sharma,Priyanka Devi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.
2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned summon dated 22.04.2024 in Case No.272 of 2024 under Section 3/4 Control of Goonda Act, P.S. Juhi, Distt. Kanpur Nagar issued by the respondent no.3.
3. Learned A.G.A. raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has opportunity to submit reply to the impugned summon raising all the objections including that of jurisdiction to issue notice before the competent authority in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Director and Anr. Vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and Anr., (2004)3 SCC 440. Thereafter, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the Competent Authority, if any, he can assail the validity of the same before the Revisional Commissioner in accordance with law.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose off this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit reply to the impugned summon before the competent authority raising all the objections as may be available to him under law including that of jurisdiction. In case any such objection is filed within two weeks from today, the authority concerned shall decide the objections in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of a copy of this order along with copy of the reply, after affording opportunity to the petitioner. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is further aggrieved by the decision of the Competent Authority, he can always assail the validity of the same before the Revisional Authority in accordance with law.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner.
Order Date :- 24.10.2024 SP/