High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 10 UK CK 0120

Bhajan Kaur vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 20 October 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravindra Maithani, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1480 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 355 words

Ravindra Maithani, J

1.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for direction to the respondent’s no. 1 to 3 carry out investigation against the respondent no. 4 to 13 on the complaint of the petitioner. (Annexure No. 1).

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for direction to the respondent no. 1 to 3 calling for records as to on what basis the respondent no. 4 to 13 carried out raid in the house of the petitioner on 13/09/2023.

(iii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3.

It is the case of the petitioner that the private respondents, who are employee of the forest department, barged into the house of the petitioner on 13.09.2023, and opened the boxes and took various valuable articles from the house of the petitioner, including jewellery and cash. When the matter was reported, no action was taken.

4.

In essence, the petitioner seeks criminal proceedings against the private respondents. The petitioner indirectly wants that an FIR may be lodged and investigation may be carried out.

5.

The petitioner may approach the police under Section under Section 154 or 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code”), or under Section 156(3) of the Code, the petitioner may approach the Magistrate having jurisdiction in the matter, or the petitioner is also at liberty to file a criminal complaint, if so advised.

6.

In the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2008) 2 SCC 409, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, inter alia, observed that in such matters for directing investigation, writ petition should not be entertained.

7.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to make any interference. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

8.

The petition is dismissed in limine.