The High Court declined to quash the FIR but directed that the petitioner not be arrested until the police submit the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., upon promise of full cooperation during the investigation.
Petitioner shall not be arrested till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. subject to full cooperation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 4 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10590 of 2018 Petitioner :- Suresh Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Samit Gopal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.
This writ petition has been by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 11.4.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0045 of 2018, under Sections 409 IPC, P.S. Manikpur, District- Chitrakoot.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned FIR has been lodged by respondent no. 4 nine years after the retirement of the petitioner from service falsely alleging commission of financial irregularities by him in collusion with the Construction Agency, which was entrusted the work of constructing the building of Primary Health Centre, Barahamafi, District- Chitrakoot in the financial year 2007-08. It is further contended that apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no credible evidence whatsoever is forthcoming, even prima facie indicating the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged crime and the impugned FIR, which is a bundle of lies and product of malice, is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA submitted that from the perusal of the impugned FIR and on the basis of the allegations made therein, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed against the petitioner and the impugned FIR is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR, we are not inclined to quash the same.
However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct that investigation of the aforesaid case shall go on but the petitioner shall not be arrested till the submission of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. subject to his extending full co-operation during investigation.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 1.5.2018 KU
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the impugned FIR under Section 409 IPC.
Whether conditions can be imposed on the petitioner during investigation.
The proper manner of final disposal of a writ petition under Article 226.
Suresh Dubey
State Of U.P.
Bala Krishna Narayana
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
