Allahabad High Court
SMT. SANJANA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous because a criminal FIR had already been lodged.
Summary
Petitioners Smt. Sanjana and another filed a writ petition challenging actions of the State of U.P. and others. The Additional Chief Standing Counsel informed the court that a criminal FIR (Case Crime No. 60 of 2026) had already been lodged under Sections 87 and 137(2) of the Indian Penal Code at Durgaganj Police Station, Bhadohi. The petitioners did not contest this submission. The court held that the existence of the FIR rendered the writ petition infructuous. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the filing of a criminal FIR makes the writ petition infructuous and therefore non-maintainable?
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous
- FIR
- dismissal
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 24516 of 2026
Smt. Sanjana And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Archana Yadav, Deepak Kumar Singh,
Mohit Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. At the very outset, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits
that in the instant matter F.I.R. has already been lodged as Case Crime
No. 60 of 2026, under Section 87/ 137(2) BNS, Police Station Durgaganj,
District Bhadohi, and therefore, the instant petition has become
infructuous.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners could not dispute the aforesaid
submissions made by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
3. In view of above, the instant petition has become infructuous and is
accordingly dismissed.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 8, 2026
Mustaqeem.
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…