AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 210 wordsS. C. Chaurasia, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and perused the F.I.R. as also the relevant material on record.
There is no need to issue notice to opposite party no. 5 who is an accused in this case. Therefore issuance of notice in respect of opposite party no. 5 is dispensed with.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that even after lodging of the F.I.R. in question on 20.09.2008 in respect of serious offence under Sections 363, 366, 364 I.P.C. neither any arrest has been made nor the kidnappee has been recovered till date. It is further submitted that the investigation is not being conducted in a proper and satisfactory manner, hence this writ petition has been filed.
Learned A.G.A. has nothing to say substantial against it who has already been put in appearance on behalf of opposite parties nos. 1 to 4.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly having regard to the submission made hereinabove by the learned counsel for the petitioner this petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the opposite party no. 2, Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur to get the investigation conducted expeditiously in a proper and satisfactory manner in accordance with law.