Allahabad High Court
BHEEM SINGHversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is dismissed because the unexplained delay of over two years bars the writ under the doctrine of laches.
Summary
Petitioner Bheem Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR dated 11‑04‑2024 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The State argued that the petition was filed more than two years after the FIR, constituting an inordinate delay and invoking the doctrine of laches. The petitioner failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Court examined the record and found the State’s objection on delay to be well‑founded and not rebutted. Consequently, the Court held that no interference was warranted and dismissed the writ petition. The interim order previously granted was vacated.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal miscellaneous writ petition filed more than two years after the FIR is barred by limitation or laches
- Whether the petitioner’s failure to explain the delay warrants dismissal of the writ petition
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- writ petition
- delay
- laches
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- limitation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5573 of 2026
Bheem Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Sahu, Sanjay Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Praveen Kumar Mishra
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Mr Ravi Sahu, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned AGA
representing State respondents 1&2 and Mr Praveen Kumar Mishra, the
learned counsel for first informant respondent no. 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner Bheem Singh has approached this Court by means of present
Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 11.04.2024
lodged by first informant respondent 3 Vikram Singh and registered as Case
Crime No. 156 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police
Station Hanumant Vihar, District Kanpur Nagar.
4. At the very outset, the learned AGA representing State respondents 1 and
2 submits that present writ petition has been filed after an expiry of a period
of more than two years from the date of impugned FIR. As such the present
writ petition is hopelessly barred by delay/laches. However, the delay/laches
in filing the present writ petition have not been sufficiently explained.
5. It is thus urged by the learned AGA that since there is a delay in filing the
present writ petition, but the delay in filing the present writ petition has not
been sufficiently explained, therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be
dismissed on the ground of delay/laches. As such, no interference is
warranted by this Court in present writ petition.
6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for the petitioner could
CRLP No. 5573 of 2026
2
not overcome the same.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA
representing State respondents 1 & 2, the learned counsel representing first
informant respondent no. 3 and upon perusal of record, we find that the
objections raised by learned AGA in opposition to present writ petition are
clearly borne out from the record. Furthermore, the same could not be
dislodged by the learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the
record. In view of above, no interference is warranted by this Court in
present writ petition. The writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed.
8. It is accordingly dismissed.
9. Interim order if any shall stands vacated.
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
April 20, 2026
Arif
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…