Disposed

Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2023WRIA/16953/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition questioning a charge-sheet due to alleged duplicity with a criminal FIR. The court directed the petitioner to approach the disciplinary authority to seek a stay under Regulation 492 of UP Police Regulations within three weeks, with the inquiry to be stayed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to approach disciplinary authority within three weeks for stay under Regulation 492 of UP Police Regulations due to pendency of criminal trial.

Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:199352

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16953 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Sonu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶7

Petitioner has approached this Court questioning the charge-sheet on the ground that the charges are the same as the allegations have been made in the first information report lodged in connection with Case Crime No.508 of 2019 under Sections 60/63 of the UP Excise Act, 120-B of Indian Penal Code.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner that in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of M.Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & anr reported in 1999 (3) SCC 679 , the disciplinary authority must await the decision of the judicial/criminal trial. He submits that in view of para 492 of UP Police Regulations, petitioner is entitled to protection by this Court in so far as criminal proceedings are concerned.

¶9

Lenard Standing Counsel, on the contrary, submits that the petitioner may approach the competent authority in the matter at the first instance, who may examine this aspect of the

¶10

matter being advanced before this Court.

¶11

In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with the direction that in the event petitioner prefers an application/representation within three weeks before the disciplinary authority raising the plea that charge-sheet is based upon the same allegations as made in connection with criminal case (supra), the departmental proceedings be stayed in view of the provisions contained under Regulation 492 of the UP Police Regulations, the same shall be disposed of within further period of one month on its own merit before the authority proceeds further in the matter of departmental inquiry pursuant to the charge-sheet dated 19.06.2020.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.10.2023 Shiraz

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SHIRAZ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Pyare Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr. Amir Khan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dr. Vivek Prakash Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vineeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Surendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others