Whether Lucknow police is a competent court and it can provide civil remedy as done by it?

 

जनसुनवाई
समन्वित शिकायत निवारण प्रणाली, उत्तर
प्रदेश

 

सन्दर्भ संख्या:-  40015719067227

 

लाभार्थी
का
विवरण

 

नाम
Dinesh Pratap Singh
पिता/पति का
नाम
Angad Prasad Singh
मोबइल नंबर()
9838919619
मोबइल नंबर()
आधार कार्ड .
मेल
arunpratapsingh904@gmail.com
पता
Surekapuram Lakshmi Narayan Baikunth Mahadev
Mandir Mirzapur 231001

 

आवेदन
पत्र का ब्यौरा

 

आवेदन
पत्र का संक्षिप्त ब्यौरा
Honourable Sir may be
pleased to take the perusal of the following complaint cum grievance and annexure attached to the grievance which is an order passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at Allahabad in the Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006
जनसुनवाई समन्वित शिकायत निवारण प्रणाली, उत्तर प्रदेश सन्दर्भ संख्या:-40015719066963 APPLICANT
DETAILS : Name: Dinesh Pratap Singh Father Name: Angad Prasad Singh Gender:
MALE Mobile- 9838919619. In this complaint cum grievance, the applicant wants
to draw the kind attention of the respondent number second who is senior
superintendent of police Lucknow as well as the station house officer police
station Ashiyana who is the respondent number 3 in the Writ Petition Number 135
HC Year 2006 filed in the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at
Allahabad filed by Anuradha Singh also named Guddi also named Aradhana Singh
through her mother Beena Singh wife of Brijraj Singh Beena Singh wife of
Netrpal Singh. Whether in the same matter, to get remedy from various
redressal bodies and get public aid by changing the name is not illegal? This
lady took the land of LDA by bearing the name of Guddi daughter of Brijraj
Singh and in order to seek remedy from High court of Judicature at Allahabad,
she took the new name Anuradha Singh and now she has been Aradhna Singh
whether it is not a mockery of the law of land? . Sir, please take a glance
of the affidavit submitted by the sub-inspector Satyesh Prakash Dwivedi in
the Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006. This affidavit is on behalf of the
respondent number 2 and 3 so it is the responsibility of concerned to
maintain the sanctity of the affidavit. Sir order of the High court of
judicature was for respondent number 1.2 and 3. Sir how can it be justified
that Aradhana changed name of Guddi and Anuradha could manage the support of
respondent number 1, 2 and 3 to get illegal possession of the land and house
of the applicant by robbing the household articles of the applicant and
fabricating the false charges not only on the applicant but also on his wife
and daughter? Whether this step of the aforementioned respondents had not
undermined the authority of High court of judicature and against the spirit
of the affidavit submitted by them through the aforementioned sub-inspector
as the spirit of the affidavit was crushed by them? Whether High court of
judicature had ordered to slap false and fabricated charges on the applicant
and his wife and daughter as a conspiracy to provide illegal possession to
Anuradha Singh now Aradhana Singh and loot the valuables of the applicant by breaking the Locks of rooms? Whether it was the motive of the High court in passing the order that police may play the role of a competent court and competent administrative body as ordered in the writ of multi named
personality Anuradha Singh to seek a civil remedy before the competent court? Whether the civil remedy is provided by the police in this largest democracy in the world and the police is the competent court?
संदर्भ
दिनांक
05-10-2019
पूर्व सन्दर्भ(यदि कोई है
तो)
0,0
विभाग
गृह
एवं गोपन
शिकायत
श्रेणी
पुलिस
के विरूद्ध शिकायती प्रार्थना पत्र

 

लाभार्थी का विवरण/शिकायत क्षेत्र का

 

शिकायत
क्षेत्र का पता

 

नोटअंoतिम कॉलम में वर्णित सन्दर्भ की
स्थिति कॉलम
-5 में अंकित अधिकारी के स्तर पर हुयी कार्यवाही दर्शाता है

 

 

संदर्भ संख्या : 40015719066963 , दिनांक – 05 Oct 2019 तक की स्थिति
आवेदनकर्ता का विवरण :
शिकायत संख्या:- 40015719066963
आवेदक का नामDinesh Pratap Singh
विषय

Most revered Sir Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to the following submissions as follows. 1It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that 51A. Fundamental duties It shall be the duty of every citizen of India a to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform  to safeguard public property and to abjure violence j to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement . 2It is submitted before
the Hon’ble Sir that Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take the perusal of the following submissions. Most respected Superintendent of police, District Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, the applicant aggrieved Dinesh Pratap Singh, wants to draw the kind attention of the revered Sir to the order passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at Allahabad in the Writ Petition Number-135 H C Year 2006 as follows It is simply ordered that the respondent number 4 to7 shall open the lock of the stair case so that Smt Anuradha Singh
the petitioner may come out of the house and take the proper and appropriate remedy in the competent court and after that, she may have the liberty to go anywhere. Since it is not a case in the strict sense of illegal detention, therefore, no direction can be issued to the respondent to produce the detenue in the court and allow her to live free at her home but since she can not take necessary steps for taking the remedy in the competent court, therefore it is simply ordered that the alleged detenue Smt Anuradha Singh shall be allowed to
go out of the house and respondent number 4 to 7 shall open the lock of the door and open the door so that Smt Anuradha Singh may come out and take appropriate remedy. Dated-07/03/2006 Signed by the concerned Honourable Justices
of Division bench of Lucknow. It would be better to take perusal by Sir itself. Respondent 1 State of U.P. through Secretary of home. 2- S.S.P. Lucknow 3S.H.O. Ashiyana Police station. Whether competent court means police as defined by the aforementioned respondents To open the lock of the door and open the door for seeking appropriate remedy means to open the door for always and hatching a
conspiracy against the applicant and his family. Consequently, a fabricated First Information Report by colluding with the police was lodged in the police station Ashiyana on 11 July 2009 after 3 years 4 months 4 days of Judgement
Dated07032006 under sections of I.P.C. as case number 2692009 Indian Penal Code sections 448,406,420,467,468,471,394 of India Penal Code. All these documents were submitted by the police before the Lucknow bench of High court of
judicature at Allahabad and the court took the cognizance and passed the order in accordance with the law but later on police found the records forged and aforementioned fabricated charges not only framed on the applicant but on his
wife and daughter as well. Thus terrorised entire family so they fled by putting locks in the rooms latter locks were broken and the entire house was grabbed even valuables were looted. Which means Lucknow police had submitted forged records before the High court along with the affidavit. Thus a competent and appropriate court delivered the Judgement
विभाग पुलिस
शिकायत श्रेणी नियोजित तारीख– –31-10-2019
शिकायत की स्थिति–  स्तर क्षेत्राधिकारी स्तर
पद क्षेत्राधिकारी

Reminder- Feedback –

फीडबैक की स्थिति
संलग्नक देखें
नोटअंतिम कॉलम में वर्णित सन्दर्भ की स्थिति कॉलम-5 में अंकित अधिकारी के स्तर पर हुयी कार्यवाही दर्शाता है!

अग्रसारित विवरण :
क्र..
सन्दर्भ का प्रकार
आदेश देने वाले अधिकारी
प्राप्त/आपत्ति दिनांक
नियत दिनांक
अधिकारी को प्रेषित
आदेश
स्थिति
1
अंतरित
ऑनलाइन
सन्दर्भ
01-10-2019
31-10-2019
क्षेत्राधिकारीक्षेत्राधिकारी कैंट ,जनपदलखनऊ,पुलिस
अनमार्क

 

3 comments on Whether Lucknow police is a competent court and it can provide civil remedy as done by it?

  1. Whether it was the motive of the High court in passing the order that police may play the role of a competent court and competent administrative body as ordered in the writ of multi named personality Anuradha Singh to seek a civil remedy before the competent court? Whether the civil remedy is provided by the police in this largest democracy in the world and the police is the competent court?

  2. Lucknow bench, High Court of judicature at Allahabad directed secretary of home and Senior Superintendent of Police Lucknow to be instrumental in opening the gate of the corridor so that Anuradha Singh may seek civil remedy/justice from the competent court in order to get the Civil remedy but instead of this Lucknow police provided has delivered justice by getting the cryptic approval from the senior rank staff of the Government of Uttar Pradesh as the home secretary was the respondent number one in the writ filed now he must reveal that under which provision Lucknow police was delegated the power of competent court to provide the civil remedy to multi named lady. Whether instruments adopted by the Lucknow police to provide the illegal possession to the lady Anuradha Singh is justified?

  3. प्राप्त रिमाइंडर-प्राप्त फीडबैक –
    दिनांक05-11-2019 को फीडबैक:-श्री मान जी कुंडी खोल कर दरवाजा खोलने का आदेश लखनऊ पीठ माननीय उच्च न्यायालय इलाहाबाद ने इसलिए दिया की अनुराधा सिंह उर्फ आराधना सिंह उर्फ गुड्डी सक्षम न्यायालय के समक्ष वाद प्रस्तुत कर सिविल उपचार हासिल करे | उपरोक्त ने क्या उपचार हासिल किया है | श्री मान जी किस अधिसूचना के माध्यम से लखनऊ पुलिस को सिविल कोर्ट को दर्जा प्राप्त है या किसी सक्षम अधिकरण या न्यायालय ने लखनऊ पुलिस को अपना अधिकार डेलिगेट कर दिया है जिससे की लखनऊ पुलिस ने उपरोक्त महिला को जमीन और मकान का मालिकाना हक प्रदान कर दिया और न सिर्फ प्रार्थी बल्कि औरत बेटी के खिलाफ संगीन धाराओं में मुक़दमा कर दिया और उनके हटते ही मकान का ताला तोड़ कर मकान पर कब्ज़ा कर लिया गया समस्त गृहस्थी और दुसरे कीमती सामानों को लूट लिया गया इस तरह से लखनऊ पुलिस माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेशो का अक्षरशः पालन किया है | श्री मान जी दश भिन्न भिन्न शिकायतों में एक ही रिपोर्ट लगा कर लखनऊ पुलिस अपने दायित्वों से इति श्री कर लेती है या तो पुलिस विभाग को शिकायतों का निवेदन समझ में नही आता या जान बूझ कर समझने का प्रयास नही करते | मामले में सम्बंधित पुलिस कर्मियों के विरुद्ध नियमानुसार कार्यवाही होनी चाहिए और उच्च न्यायालय आदेश की यथा स्थिति बहाल होनी चाहिए | पुलिस का रिपोर्ट सिर्फ भ्रामक है किसी भी तरह से स्वीकार किया जाता तो उच्च न्यायालय के द्वारा पारित आदेश का उल्लंघन होगा |

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: