Dismissed¶8

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2025CRLP/1044/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused — examination impersonation: bio-metric mismatch (details sent to NTA, Delhi) revealed Saurabh Kumar appeared in the examination in place of petitioner Manish Kumar; FIR dated 5.1.2025 (Case Crime No. 6 of 2025, P.S. Lanka, Varanasi) under BNS Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 338, 340(2) and Uttar Pradesh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act 2024 Sections 4, 13, 7 held prima facie to disclose cognizable offence; relied on State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335), M/s Neeharika Infrastructure (AIR 2021 SC 1918) and Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati (SLP (Crl.) No.3262/2021, decided 07.10.2021); writ petition dismissed, no protection from arrest granted.

What did the court decide?

Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. ¶7

Manish Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9396-DB

¶2

Court No. - 43

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1044 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav,Rishabh Raj Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A for the State respondents.

¶7

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 5.1.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 6 of 2025 under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 338, 340(2) of B.N.S. and Section 4, 13, 7, 13 of Uttar Pradesh Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means), Act, 2024, Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶8

As per contents of first information report one Saurabh Kumar s/o Bharat Lal Baranwal, accused no. 1 in the FIR was appearing in place of the petitioner herein, Manish Kumar s/o Bhai Lal on the admit card with roll number as given in the FIR, which was downloaded, wherein photograph of Saurabh Kumar was pasted and he was found to have been appeared in the examination and was taken into custody on the spot.

¶9

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has not appeared in the examination and has no concern whatsoever with the incident and no offence is made out against the petitioner.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence.

¶11

On perusal of record we find that bio-metric details of the candidates were sent to NTA, Delhi and the details of the petitioner was not matched with the details of the candidates (the petitioner herein, Manish Kumar), therefore, the authorities got suspicious

¶12

and thorough scrutiny was done and thereafter it was found that Saurabh Kumar was appearing in the examination in place of the petitioner herein.

¶13

Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.

¶14

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Lalit Shukla

¶16

Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Kumar Gupta Alias Ramji vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Indrajit and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Shahana Detainu and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sonu @ Mosin vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kunal Alias Kunal Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others