Pankaj Dikshit vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2015 Latest Caselaw 5627 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 40
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 29843 of 2015
 

 
Petitioner :- Pankaj Dikshit
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Hanuman Prasad Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of  the fact that the election in Block Kamalganj was held on 5.12.2015, it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed any offence under section 171-G I.P.C. by publishing the offending news items on 8.12.2015. It  is further submitted that Section 66A of I.T. Act  has been struck down by the Apex Court in the case of Writ Petition (Criminal) No.167 of 2012 Shreya Singhal Vs. Union of India decided on 24.3.21015 and in view of above  the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, prima facie, appear to be correct. The matter requires consideration.

Learned A.G.A has accepted notice on behalf of opposite party nos.1 and  2. He prays for and is allowed six weeks' time to file counter affidavit.

Issue notice to opposite party no. 3, who may also file counter affidavit within the same period.

Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List this matter immediately after eight weeks before the appropriate Court.

Till the next date of listing or till the submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C, whichever is later, the petitioner shall not be arrested pursuant to impugned FIR dated 10.12.2015 registered as Case Crime no.1098 of 2015, under section 66A of Information Technology (Amended) Act, 2008 read with section 171G I.P.C., Police Station Farrukhabad Kotwali, District Farrukhabad

Order Date :- 21.12.2015

RU