The single judge dismissed a writ petition because the petitioner deliberately failed to disclose material facts concerning an existing pending criminal case for embezzlement and a prior punishment order.
The writ petition was dismissed on the ground of deliberate non-disclosure of material facts regarding pending criminal charges.
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. - 81
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1114 of 2020
Petitioner :- Jagat Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Ravindra Singh who appears for the second respondent.
There is a deliberate non disclosure of material facts since Sri Ravindra Singh draws the attention of the Court to an order of punishment passed on 17 August 2015. From that order it is further disclosed that the petitioner was also charged of having embezzled Rs. 15 lacs and in respect of which a criminal case is also continuing. In light of the aforesaid, the Court finds no ground to entertain this petition which shall stand dismissed . This order however shall not preclude the petitioner from adopting such other remedies as may be available in law.
Order Date :- 27.1.2020 faraz
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition where the petitioner deliberately withholds material facts regarding an order of punishment and pending criminal charges for embezzlement.
Jagat Singh
State of U.P.
Another
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
