Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAJJAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner should approach the Police Commissioner through an application, and therefore the writ petition is disposed of without granting mandamus.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajjan Kumar, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Police Commissioner of Prayagraj to take action on an FIR dated 25‑01‑2020 (Case Crime No. 65 of 2020) involving offences under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 of the IPC and sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act. He alleged that the police were not investigating the case impartially due to political pressure. The Court examined whether it could issue a writ of mandamus compelling the police commissioner to order a fair investigation. It held that the appropriate remedy was for the petitioner to move an application before the Police Commissioner, who can ensure a fair and expeditious investigation. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the relief sought.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the Police Commissioner to order investigation of an FIR.
  • Whether the petitioner has a remedy under the writ jurisdiction for alleged police inaction or bias.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • mandamus
  • police investigation
  • FIR
  • political pressure
  • SC/ST Act
  • criminal procedure
  • writ petition

Judgment

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

          CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21449 of 2026

Rajjan Kumar
                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Ram Adhar Ram, Santosh Kumar Singh,
                                   Shyam Chandra
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : G.A.

Court No. - 47
                   HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J.
                   HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and
perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following
relief:

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondent no.3 i.e. Police Commissioner, Commissionerate, District
Prayagraj to take the appropriate action in view of the first information
report dated 25.1.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 65 of 2020 under
section 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and 3 (1) (Da) and 3(1) (Dha), SC/ST
Act, Police Station-Meja, District Prayagraj as the respondent no.4 & 5 due
to influence of political pressure is not taking the proper action against the
accused persons i.e. respondent no. 6 to 8.

B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus calling the
progress report from the concerned respondents in Case Crime No. 65 of
2020, under section 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha)
SC/ST Act Police Station- Meja, District -Prayagraj, as the concerned Police
is fully in active.

C. Issue any other suitable writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

D. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner."
                                                                                             CRLP No. 21449 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the first
                                    informant in the present case and though the FIR in the instant case has been
                                    registered on 25.1.2020, yet the police is not investigating the case in fair
                                    and impartial manner.

                                    4. In view of the above, the petitioner may move an application before the
                                    Police Commissioner, Commissionerate Prayagraj, highlighting his
                                    grievance and seeking fair and impartial investigation and if such an
                                    application is moved before the Police Commissioner, Commissionerate
                                    Prayagraj, the Police Commissioner, Commissionerate Prayagraj/respondent
                                    no.3 shall ensure the fair, impartial and expeditious investigation in the
                                    present case.

                                    5. With the aforesaid observation, the present petition stands disposed of.

                                    September 30, 2026
                                    KU
                                                                        (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.