Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 644 (ALL)

Harish Chandra v. State Of U. P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U. P. Lucknow

2024-02-29

NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, RAJAN ROY

body2024
JUDGMENT : 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. This writ petition has been filed seeking following main reliefs :- "I) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties particularly Opposite Party No.3 and 4 not to interfere in the peaceful living of the petitioner on the basis of proceeding initiated against the petitioner Under Section 3 (1), 6 and 9 U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 (Contained as Annexure No.1, 3 and 5), in the interest of justice. II) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to the Opposite Party No.3 i.e. Superintendent of Police, District Sultanpur to remove the name of petitioner from the list of Goonda of Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur as the petitioner is not a habitual offender or indulge in any criminal activity, in the interest of justice." 4. The period of externment has already expired, as claimed by the petitioner's counsel. Petitioner is on bail in all the three criminal cases lodged against him, as claimed. 5. Learned A.G.A. states that the records are maintained by the police station concerned as to the Goondas in its area and there is no question of removal of the name of the petitioner from any list, such as one which happens in the case of history-sheeters. Petitioner is not a history sheeter. 6. If the petitioner is on bail in all the three criminal cases, then unless there are valid grounds in law for interfering in peaceful living of the petitioner, the police shall not interfere. 7. If the petitioner has any grievance in this regard, he may approach the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur raising his grievance, who can look into the matter, and do the needful so that the process of law is followed. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.