Allahabad High Court
PARUL PAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
The petition is dismissed as it has become infructuous due to the prior lodging of an FIR.
Summary
Petitioners Parul Pal and another filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The State's standing counsel informed the Court that an FIR had already been lodged in Crime No. 167 of 2026 under Section 87, rendering the petition unnecessary. Petitioners did not contest this submission. The Court held that the existence of the FIR made the petition infructuous. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an FIR has already been lodged in the matter.
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous
- FIR
- dismissal
- procedural
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 36663 of 2026
Parul Pal And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Praveen Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel submits that in the instant
case an F.I.R. has already been lodged in Case Crime No. 167 of 2026
under Section 87 of B.N.S. Police Station Ram chandra Mission, District
Shahjahanpur, and therefore, the instant petition has become infructuous.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners could not dispute the aforesaid
submissions made by learned Standing Counsel.
3. In view of above, the instant petition has become infructuous and is
dismissed as having become infructuous.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
September 14, 2026
S.Ali
Digitally signed by :-
SHAUKAT ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…