Allahabad High Court
NIKHIL SINGH ALIAS NIKHIL PRATAPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- TARUN SAXENAMUNIR
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous because a final police report has been filed, though a fresh petition may be filed if the investigation is revived.
Summary
The petitioner, Nikhil Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him. During the pendency of the petition, the police submitted a final report, indicating the closure of the investigation. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition on the ground that it had become infructuous. The Court held that the filing of the final report rendered the petition infructuous and dismissed it, but clarified that the petitioner may file a fresh petition if the investigation is revived. The Court ordered the return of the certified copies of documents to the petitioner's counsel, with photocopies retained on record.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition challenging an FIR becomes infructuous upon the filing of a final police report
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh petition if the investigation is later revived
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 173
- Writ Petition
- Infructuous
- Police Investigation
- First Information Report
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4272 of 2026
Nikhil Singh alias Nikhil Pratap
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilendra Singh, Manoj Kumar Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 47
HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has come up with a prayer, saying
that this petition has become infructuous, because, a Final Report has
been filed by the Police.
2. Considering the aforesaid supervening event, this petition is
dismissed as infructuous.
3. However, in the event, the investigation is revived in any
contingency, whatsoever, it shall be open to the petitioner to move a fresh
petition on the same cause of action, challenging the impugned First
Information Report.
4. Certified copy of document(s) annexed shall be returned to the
learned Counsel for the petitioner, provided that photostat copy of the
same is/are retained on record.
5. Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate,
is present on behalf of the State.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.)
May 6, 2026
SK Srivastava/I. Batabyal
Digitally signed by :-
SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…