Disposed

Uday Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2019CRLP/24964/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to quash an FIR alleging forgery of a B.Ed. degree and obtaining public employment. Court disposed of petition directing that if the degree is verified as forged, arrest can follow; investigation not stayed.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with direction allowing arrest of petitioner if a superior police officer verifies the degree as forged/fabricated; investigation remains ongoing.

Uday Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24964 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Uday Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Chandra Tripathi,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv) Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Bhupendra Kumar Yadav, for respondent no.4 and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 16.11.2019 in Case Crime No.0257/2019 under sections 420,467,468,471 IPC P.S Eka, District Firozabad.

¶7

The allegation against the petitioner is that he obtained a forged B.Ed. degree from Dr.Bhim Rao Ambedkar University in the year 2004-05 and based on the same obtained a public employment initially as an Assistant Teacher in a Primary School.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on certain interim orders passed by this court i.e, in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition Nos.25052/24912/ both of 2019 on 7.12.2019, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition Nos.24942/24944/24947/24957 all of 2019 on 10.12.2019 respectively.

¶9

Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant opposed the submission on the premise that primafacie a cognizable offence is made out. No interference is required to be made.

¶10

We are of the considered view that ends of justice would be served if this petition is disposed of with the direction that in the event the degree in question is verified to be a tampered/forged/fabricated document, it would be open for the Investigating authorities to arrest the petitioner.

¶11

We further clarify that above verification would be by an officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police and that we have not stayed the ongoing investigation.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 16.12.2019 RS

Uday Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. 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

State of U.P. vs Umakant Prasad

Subhash Baboo Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Viresh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others