Dismissed

Yogesh Kumar v. the Court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jun 2018WRIC/21232/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Special Judge (PC Act), Bareilly's jurisdiction. The court rejected the petitioner's claim that the FIR was false due to his alleged transfer on the same day, noting he was caught red-handed in District Sambhal, and found no merit in the challenge.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Bareilly, was dismissed.

Yogesh Kumar Vs the Court of Special Judge (Prevention of… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21232 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Yogesh Kumar Respondent :- The Court Of Special Judge (Prevention Of Corruption Act) And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Jeet Yeadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the jurisdiction of the court of Special Judge (Prevention and Corruption Act), Bareilly to take cognizance of the First Information Report/ Case Crime No. 0011 of 2018 dated 19.01.2018 under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station- Mainather, District- Moradabad with the submission that the said act of the Special Judge (Prevention and Corruption Act) is ultra-vires of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution and in violation of Section 2(c)(viii) and 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶7

On a pointed query made by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to bring the notification issued by the State Government conferring jurisdiction upon the Special Judge (Prevention and Corruption Act), Bareilly with regard to the matter relating to District- Moradabad, wherein the first information report was lodged.

¶8

Only submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegations made in the first information report regarding the petitioner having received bribe on 19.1.2018, while being posted as Junior Engineer in Electricity Distribution Division, Sambhal, Sub-Division- Mahmoodpur, District- Sambhal, is totally false in as much as the petitioner was transferred on 13.01.2018 from District Sambhal to Meerut. Though, he could not join the new posting as he was arrested on 19.1.2018 and lodged in jail but he cannot be implicated on the allegation of receipt of bribe in relation to a matter of District Moradabad.

¶9

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not posted in District Sambhal on 19.1.2018 and as such there was no occasion for the Pre-trap Team to catch the petitioner in red handed. the entire allegations are,

¶10

thus, concocted story.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has not been able to answer as and when the petitioner was relieved from District Sambhal pursuant to the transfer order dated 13.1.2018 passed by Managing Director Prashimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Victoria Park, Meerut.

¶12

From a careful perusal of the first information report, it is more apparent that the petitioner was caught red-handed by Pre-trap Team constituted by the competent authority while receiving bribe from the villagers for installation of tube-wells.

¶13

For the allegation mentioned in the first information report and the facts noted hereinabove, this Court does not find any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) Bareilly had acted illegally in taking cognizance of the matter.

¶14

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.6.2018 Atmesh

Yogesh Kumar v. the Court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Kumar v. the Court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuj Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kanti Swaroop Jindal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr. Durvesh Chaudhary Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Health and Welfare, New Delhi and 4 Others

Pankaj Kumar Rai and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Salma Shekh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Shivani and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others