Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.
Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Shafiq vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, … on 20 February, 2024
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. – 2024:AHC-LKO:15703
Court No. – 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. – 857 of 2023
Petitioner :- Mohd. Shafiq
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nazmul Hasan,Umesh Chandra
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon’ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner, however, Shri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents is present.
3. The present petition has been filed seeking following main reliefs:-
“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Criminal Revision No.486/2022; Mohd Shafiq vs. State of U.P. and impugned order dated 06.09.2022 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.3677/2021; Mohd Shafiq vs. Unknown, Police Station-Sushant Golf City, Lucknow contained in Annexure No.1 and 2 to the writ petition respectively.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party No.3 the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.27, Lucknow to pass a fresh order in the Complaint No.27187/2022, Police Station-Sushant Golf City, Lucknow; Mohd. Shafiq vs. Unknown on the basis of statement made by the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statements of the two witnesses made under Section 202 Cr.P.C. according the provision of complaint.”
4. As per the averments made in the present petition, the petitioner lost his Scooter bearing Registration No.UP32 KH2019, on 15.03.2019 from Ansal Golf City, Lucknow, which he alleged that it was stolen and also alleged that one cheque was also kept in the Scooter at that time. The petitioner immediately informed the police station concerned but after passing of two years, no action was taken by the police, thereafter, the petitioner moved an application before the Police Commissioner, Lucknow on 20.07.2021 requesting therein to take appropriate action but after lapse of so many months the petitioner being hopeless and dissatisfied by inaction on the part of police moved an application before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.27, Lucknow on 03.08.2021 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but the Magistrate concerned rejected the application of the petitioner after affording him opportunity of hearing vide order dated 12.11.2021.
5. Thereafter, being aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.27, Lucknow, the petitioner preferred a Criminal Revision No.296/2021; Mohd Shafiq vs. State of U.P. before learned Sessions Judge, Lucknow which was allowed vide order dated 29.03.2022 with direction to the learned trial court to pass a fresh order after rehearing the petitioner.
6. After remand of the case, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.27, Lucknow the application which was earlier moved by the petitioner under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was converted into Complaint No.27184/2022, Police Station-Sushant Gold City, Lucknow; Mohd Shafiq vs. Unknown and recorded the statement of the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statements of two witnesses namely-Ashish Kumar Rathore and Chandra Shekhar were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and after perusing the entire records a fresh, passed the order dated 27.06.2022 and directed the police station concerned to investigate the matter. Thereafter, the police station concerned submitted a report stating therein the said Scooter of the petitioner is lying with one Khushi Mani Tripathi which was handed over to her by the petitioner himself against a sale consideration amount of Rs.40,000/- on the assurance given by the petitioner that sale will be made in favour of her. It was further stated that Khushi Mani Tripathi lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioner bearing Case Crime No.472/2021 under Section 406 I.P.C. and Section 138 N.I. Act at Police Station-Sushant Golf City, Lucknow and the chargesheet in that case has also been submitted.
7. It is also alleged in the petition that learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.27 Lucknow relying solely on the police enquiry report again rejected the case of the petitioner vide impugned order 06.09.2022, thereafter, the petitioner again preferred a Criminal Revision No.486/2022; Mohd Shafiq vs. State of U.P., which was also rejected vide impugned order dated 19.12.2022, thus, he submits that both the orders have been passed without application of judicial mind and the trial courts have not considered the factual matrix of the case and have passed the impugned orders in a cursory manner, which are liable to be set aside and the present petition may be allowed.
8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent has vehemently opposed the contentions made on behalf of the petitioner and submits that as per his own case he has admitted that an F.I.R. has already been lodged against him by one Khushi Mani Tripathi and chargesheet has also been submitted against him bearing Case Crime No.472/2021 under Section 406 I.P.C. and Section 138 N.I. Act at Police Station-Sushant Golf City, Lucknow, thus, it transpires that the petitioner has tried to initiate a prosecution against some unknown persons in order to save himself from the prosecution initiated against him by one Khushi Mani Tripathi under Section 138 N.I. Act by making vague allegation that he has also lost a cheque with his Scooter. He further submits that the trial courts have rightly passed the impugned orders after going through the entire material placed before it and also taking note of the facts which came up after the police submitted an enquiry report in the matter. Thus, no interference by this Court is warranted in this case and the petition being devoid of merit and substance may be dismissed.
9. After going through the averments made in the petition and after considering the arguments advanced by learned A.G.A. for the State, this Court does not find any ground to entertain this petition and there appears force in the argument of learned A.G.A. for the State that the petitioner has tried to initiate a prosecution against some unknown persons in order to save himself from the prosecution initiated against him by one Khushi Mani Tripathi under Section 138 N.I. Act by making vague allegation that he has also lost a cheque with his Scooter and further considering the fact that the trial courts have called for report of the police station concerned and have perused the said report before passing the impugned orders, thus, I do not find any illegality and infirmity in the impugned orders, the present petition being devoid of merit and substance is liable to be dismissed.
10. In view thereof, the present petition is hereby dismissed.
11. No order as to cost(s).
Order Date :- 20.2.2024
Piyush/-
