Dismissed

Narendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2022A482/2145/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a second FIR regarding embezzlement of wheat. The court held that since the earlier FIR involved rice, the two complaints were based on different facts and did not warrant the exercise of inherent powers.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to quash the criminal proceedings under the second FIR is rejected.

Narendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2145 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijendra Kumar Raj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceeding of First Information Report dated 30.08.2019 in Case Crime No. 0572/2019, under Sections 420, 409 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Fatehpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that on the same facts and allegations FIR No. 938/2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Fatehpur has been filed against the applicant. In Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 36045/2018 vide order dated 12.12.2018 arrest of the petitioner was stayed till the credible evidence is not collected.

¶8

It is also submitted that second F.I.R. has been filed on the same facts and allegations i.e. Case Crime No. 572/2019 under Sections 420, 409 I.P.C.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. submitted that in Case Crime No. 938/2018 charge sheet has been filed by the Investigating Officer against the applicant. The matter relates to embezzlement of rice and wheat from storage about Rs. 1,41,01,796/-. Applicant was posted as store incharge.

¶10

From the perusal of the F.I.Rs, it is apparent that in this F.I.R. matter relates to 804 bags of wheat whereas the previous F.I.R. relates to 620 bags of rice. Thus, it is clear that both the F.I.Rs. have been lodged on different facts.

¶11

Thus, on the basis of discussion above it is clear that it is not a fit case in which inherent power should be used to quash impugned F.I.R.

¶12

Perused the material on record I do not find, it a fit case to exercise inherent power in favour of the applicant.

¶13

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has no force and is rejected, accordingly.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.7.2022 Sharad/-

¶15

Digitally signed by SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.14 09:36:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Narendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Yogesh Urf Golu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munna Khan Vs State of U.P.and Another

Yogendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S. D. Pauls Capital Limited and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rameshchandra Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another