The Allahabad High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus for the expeditious investigation of an FIR lodged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Court directed the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation within a reasonable timeframe, while granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate if necessary.
Background & Facts
The Genesis
The petitioner, Manish Gautam, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking a mandamus to compel the State of Uttar Pradesh to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation in Case Crime No. 0496/2026, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki. The FIR was lodged on 02.07.2026 under the following sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS):
- Section 115(2) (Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty)
- Section 118(2) (Threat of injury to public servant)
- Section 125 (Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale)
- Section 333 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous means)
- Section 351(3) (Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour a woman)
- Section 109(1) (Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence)
- Section 3(5) (Punishment for acts of violence against women)
The petitioner alleged that he had suffered injuries and that the investigation had not progressed despite the lapse of time.
Key Facts
- The FIR was registered on 02.07.2026 at Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki.
- The petitioner claimed to have suffered injuries as a result of the alleged offence.
- The investigation had not made significant progress by the date of the hearing.
- The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation.
Procedural History
- 02.07.2026: FIR lodged under the aforementioned sections of the BNS.
- Date of filing: The writ petition was filed before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench.
- Hearing date: The matter was heard on 22.07.2026.
The Parties' Positions
For the Petitioner
The petitioner, through counsel Haridwar Singh, argued that the investigation had not progressed despite the lapse of time and that the petitioner had suffered injuries. He sought a mandamus directing the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation.
For the Respondent
The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate (A.G.A.), submitted that:
- One person had been arrested in connection with the case.
- One person was absconding.
- The role of two persons had been identified based on the statement of an eye witness.
- The investigation would be completed expeditiously.
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought the following relief:
- A writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation of the FIR.
- The investigation was to be completed within a period stipulated by the Court.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the High Court should issue a mandamus directing the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation of the FIR, given the alleged delay and the petitioner's claim of injuries.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner argued that the investigation had not progressed despite the lapse of time and that he had suffered injuries. He relied on the principles of fair and expeditious investigation to seek a mandamus from the Court.
For the Respondent
The State, through the learned A.G.A., submitted that the investigation was underway and that one person had been arrested while another was absconding. The State assured the Court that the investigation would be completed expeditiously.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the submissions of both parties and noted that the State had assured the Court of an expeditious investigation. The Court observed that while the State had taken steps to progress the investigation, the petitioner had a remedy available under the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2008) 2 SCC 409, to approach the concerned Magistrate if the investigation did not progress as expected.
The Court relied on the principles of fair and expeditious investigation and noted that the State had assured the Court of an expeditious probe. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the State's submission, while granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate if necessary.
"In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of statement of learned A.G.A. with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Magistrate in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others ; (2008) 2 SCC 409, in case the occasion arise and if so advised."
The Verdict
The Allahabad High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the State's submission. The Court directed the State to ensure a free, fair, and transparent investigation of the FIR in Case Crime No. 0496/2026. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Magistrate if the investigation did not progress as expected, relying on the judgment in Sakiri Vasu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2008) 2 SCC 409.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Mandamus for Investigation Is Not Automatic
Practitioners must note that the Court did not issue a mandamus suo motu but relied on the State's assurance of an expeditious investigation. The judgment underscores the importance of approaching the Magistrate under the principles laid down in Sakiri Vasu if the investigation does not progress.
Liberty to Approach Magistrate Is a Safeguard
- The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Magistrate if the investigation did not progress as expected.
- This aligns with the principles of fair and expeditious investigation, ensuring that the petitioner has a remedy available.
- Practitioners should advise clients to approach the Magistrate under Sakiri Vasu if the investigation is delayed without reasonable cause.
