Last Update: February 23, 2023, 07:59 IST
The applicant challenged the government’s decision before the High Court which dismissed his plea. (file photo)
The applicant had challenged the October 11, 2022 order of the lower court, in which the court had dismissed the protest petition against the final report of the police in the riot case.
The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on a man for repeatedly filing petitions against Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in the 2007 Gorakhpur riots case, even after the matter was settled by the Supreme Court.
On January 27, 2007, a Hindu man was killed in a clash between two groups during a Muharram procession in Gorakhpur. Petitioner Parvez Parvaz, a journalist, filed a complaint on September 26, 2008, alleging that Adityanath, the then local BJP MP, had given a speech to avenge the youth’s death and was in possession of videos of the same .
Subsequently, the state government refused to grant sanction for the prosecution.
The applicant challenged the government’s decision before the High Court which dismissed his plea. Later, he challenged the High Court’s decision before the Supreme Court, which also set it aside.
The applicant had challenged the trial court’s order dated October 11, 2022, dismissing the protest petition against the final police report in the riot case.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh dismissed the plea of Parvaz and others under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (vested powers of the High Court) and imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh, to be deposited in the Army Welfare Fund War Casualties within four weeks Will happen. Failure to do so would be recovered from the petitioner’s estates/assets as arrears of land revenue.
The court said, “The petitioner appears to be a busybody who himself is facing several criminal cases, and he is fighting this case since 2007. The petitioner is directed to engage lawyers to fight the case before the trial court.” I will have to spend heavily.” , this court and the Supreme Court. Senior Advocate SFA Naqvi, appearing for the applicant, argued that “the question of legality of the order, denying sanction to the prosecution, was left open by the Supreme Court and therefore, it cannot be said that the issue has taken a final stand”. has taken shape”.
Additional Advocate General Manish Goel, appearing for the state government, argued that “the issues raised in the protest petition and in this petition had attained finality in the Supreme Court”.
“The petitioner cannot be allowed to raise the same issue again and again,” he added.
The High Court after hearing the parties concerned said, “I find that the lower court has declined to go into the said question after it has been decided by the Supreme Court.”
read all latest india news Here
(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed)