Dismissed¶¶13

Niranjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation Thru Its Director New Delhi

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2025A482/7210/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC rejected as infructuous. Applicant not entitled to copy of prosecution sanction request letter not relied upon by CBI, but entitled to inspect it per Supreme Court law. Prior order in Application No. 10317/2024 already granted inspection of unrelied documents.

What did the court decide?

Application rejected as infructuous; applicant entitled to inspect letter seeking prosecution sanction but not to obtain copy ¶¶13

Niranjan Kumar Vs Central Bureau of Investigation Thru Its Director New Delhi — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15689

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7210 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Niranjan Kumar Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation Thru Its Director New Delhi Counsel for Applicant :- In Person Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Niranjan Kumar, the applicant in person and Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the CBI.

¶7

By means of the present application filed under Section 482/ 397/ 401 CrPC, the applicant has challenged the validity of the order dated passed by the Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, CBI (West), Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 3/2015, R.C. No.7A/2015 whereby the application No. B-137 filed by the applicant has been rejected by the Trial Court. A copy of the application has been annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the application, wherein the applicant has requested the Trial Court to make an inquiry into the validity of sanction and call for the sanction filed in other documents mentioned in Para 5 of the application and recalling sanctioning authority for the reasons mentioned in the application and allow the cross-examination of the sanctioning authority. The document mentioned in the application is as follows:

¶8

"a. A bunch of Loose papers containing 35 pages in respect of Income tax return acknowledgement belonging to Pragati colonizers Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2012-13 along with annexures, ITR for AY 2014-15 of Sh. Niranjan and CGHS card of Sh. Niranjan Kumar. (All Photocopies).

¶9

b. A bunch of Loose papers containing 08 pages in.r/o intimation to Dept. for booking of immovable property at Ghaziabad, Notice of Sh. Manoj Kumar, Lko and other assessment orders/IT Proceedings in r/o Lala Omkar N. Saraf, Lko, Prayagraj Power. Noida (Lko)."

¶10

A copy of the sanction order dated 14.05.2015 has already been provided to the applicant and the same has been annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the application. Now, the applicant is demanding a copy of the letter through which the prosecution sanction had been sought. The said letter has not been relied upon by the prosecution, therefore, the opposite party- CBI is not obliged to provide a copy of the letter seeking prosecution sanction of the application, however, the applicant

¶11

is entitled to inspect the sought letter in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶12

Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the CBI has submitted that the applicant has filed another application under Section 482 CrPC No. 10317 of 2024 wherein he prayed for issuing a direction to the CBI to furnish copies of unrelied upon documents mentioned in his application dated 21.09.2024 and direct the Trial Court to allow inspection of the same. The said application under Section 482 CrPC has been allowed by means of judgment and order dated 21.11.2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court wherein the CBI has been directed to produce a complete list of unrelied documents before the Trial Court and the Trial Court was directed to permit inspection of the document strictly in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the CBI has further submitted that in compliance of the aforesaid inspection of unrelied upon documents by the applicant has already been permitted.

¶13

In view of the subsequent judgment and order dated 21.11.2024 passed in Application under Section 482 CrPC No. 10317 of 2024 , the grievance of the applicant has already been redressed and the application, thus, has become infructuous and the same is rejected accordingly.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.3.2025 (Manoj K.)

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Niranjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation Thru Its Director New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation Thru Its Director New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maroof Anwar Hashmi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. / Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Alok Kumar @ Alok Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 2 Others

Ritesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and 3 Others

Km. Priya Mishra @ Shweta Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shyamu @ Ramu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others