Dismissed

Ajay Kumar Gupta v. Sri Siddharth Shankar Meena, S.P., Unnao and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024/3431/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application challenging defiance of a stay order on an FIR, the court examined police submissions. Finding that the investigation was concluded prior to the alleged contemptuous act, no contempt was made out and the application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The contempt application was dismissed as no violation of the stay order was made out.

Ajay Kumar Gupta Vs Sri Siddharth Shankar Meena, S.P… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3431 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- Sri Siddharth Shankar Meena, S.P., Unnao And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

2. On 30.8.2024, following order was passed:-

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order dated 09.05.2024 passed by Writ Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3227 of 2024 in re; Ajay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. has been willfully defied by the opposite parties. He further submits that on the basis of incorrect facts, F.I.R No.76/2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC P.S- Bangarmau, District- Unnao was lodged by one Pramod Kumar Singh due to annoyance that Kusum Rani Gupta and Madhuri Gupta have executed one power of attorney in favour of applicant. Thereafter, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3227 of 2024 (supra) was filed by the applicant, in which, stay order was passed on 09.05.2024.

¶9

3. Order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3227 of 2024 (supra) is as under: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the Staterespondent and perused the record. Both the writ petitions are decided by a common judgment.

¶10

The petitioners seek issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the First Information Report dated 11.03.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0076 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police Station- Bangarmau, District- Unnao.

¶11

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the informant/respondent No.4 is belongs to a different branch of the family as in the very first line he says that petitioner Nos. 4 & 5 are daughters of late Girija Singh and he is cousin brother of late Girija Singh. In the entire FIR, there is no details of any property belonging to the informant which is usurped by the petitioners in any manner. The allegations are only with regard to the property of father of petitioner Nos. 4 & 5 from which informant has no concerned. It is further stated that there is also a civil dispute pending between the parties and only to pressurize the petitioners, present FIR has been lodged. Prima facie, a case for consideration is made out. Issue notice to opposite party no. 4. Let the pleadings be exchanged within four weeks.

¶12

Connect and list this case after four weeks alongwith Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3283of 2024; Ajay Kumar Gupta vs. State of U.P. and others.

¶13

Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, petitioners shall not be arrested in pursuance to the First Information Report dated 11.03.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0076 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police StationBangarmau, District- Unnao. The petitioners shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get their statements recorded before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when they are called. If they do not do so then it can be a ground for seeking vacation of this inter interim order. "

¶14

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the aforesaid order was passed after hearing the learned A.G.A. and the same was communicated to the competent authorities. Despite knowing this fact that there was an interim order passed by the Writ Court, on

¶15

15.08.2024, opposite party no.2 broke into the house of applicant along with otter police personnel and scolded his family members as well as threatened that the applicant will be arrested.

¶16

5. List this case on 19.09.2024 as fresh.

¶17

6. In the meantime, Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel shall seek instructions, as to why, the order of the Writ Court has not been complied with.

¶18

7. Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to provide a copy of the contempt application to Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, forthwith.

¶19

8. On the next date, opposite party no.2 shall appear in person before this Court along with the complete case diary.

¶20

In pursuance of aforesaid order, Sri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel placed written instructions duly signed by Mr. Vinod Kumar, Sub Inspector (Investigating OfÏcer), Police Station Bangarmau, District Unnao alongwith the photo copy of the case diary, same is taken on record.

¶21

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Sub Inspector (Investigating OfÏcer), Police Station Bangarmau, District Unnao is present and informed that F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged on 11.3.2024 and after detailed investigation, final report was prepared on 28.8.2024 and the same has already been submitted in the court concerned on 18.9.2024. He also informed that applicant was never scolded as only during the course of investigation, he was called for recording his statement.

¶22

Considering the contents of the written instructions placed before this Court as well as case diary, it is evident that investigation of the case in question has already been concluded by submitting final report, therefore, no contempt is made out, accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed .

¶23

Order Date :- 19.9.2024 Gaurav/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajay Kumar Gupta v. Sri Siddharth Shankar Meena, S.P., Unnao and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Gupta v. Sri Siddharth Shankar Meena, S.P., Unnao and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohammad Arif Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shree Girraj Educational and Welfare Society Thru. Its Secy. Nand Kishore Sharma and Another Vs Dr. Alok Kumar Secy. U.P. State Medical Faculty Lko.

M/S Impulse Microelectronics Peripheral Systems Thru. Proprietor Rajesh Sachan Vs Smt. Jyoti Maurya Chief Manager Administration/Chairman U.P. Corp. Sugar Factories Federation Ltd.

Shyam Mohan Tiwari Vs K. Ravindra Nayak I.a.S., Prin. Secy. Secrtt. Administration Civil Secrtt., Lko.

Hriday Narayan Tiwari Vs Shri Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, Addl. General Manager / Unit Head R.B. Iti Ltd. Raebareli

Jagdish Kumar Vs Dr. Devesh Chaturvedi, Addl. Chief Secy. Agriculture Deptt. Lko. and Another