Allahabad High Court
Rakesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 21 January, 2021
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2172 of 2019
Petitioner :- Rakesh Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Bahadur Singh,Sanjeev Singh,Suresh Chandra Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 26.11.2018 passed by respondent no. 4 - District Nodal Officer, Recruitment Centre, District Azamgarh.
On 22.2.2019, following order was passed :
"Learned counsel for the petitioner is presently unable to state whether the charge sheet had been submitted prior to the execution of the attestation form.
Let a supplementary affidavit be filed in this respect.
Include in the list of fresh cases of 07 March 2019."
On 7.3.2019, following order was passed :
"Presently from the averments which are made in the writ petition as well as in the supplementary affidavit, the Court is unconvinced of the correctness of the statement that the petitioner was wholly unaware of the pendency of the criminal case. He shall consequently file an affidavit disclosing whether his statement was recorded under Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C. He shall also state whether he was ever summoned by the concerned Court after submission of the charge-sheet on 11 June 2017. Additionally he shall further state whether he was ever arrested during the investigation or during the pendency of the trial before the concerned Court.
List after three weeks. "
Pursuant to aforesaid orders, two supplementary affidavits have been filed before this Court. In the second affidavit, it has been categorically stated that chargesheet was submitted on 11.6.2017 and acquittal order was passed on 30.10.2018. It has further been stated that the petitioner was never arrested and his statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. was also never recorded. The submission is that the petitioner was never aware of such criminal proceedings.
The stand taken by the petitioner is that he came to know about the case registered against him at the time of police verification. Petitioner further submits that his case is squarely covered by a judgment of Apex Court rendered in Avtar Singh and other v. Union of India and others; 2016(8) SCC 471.
In such view of the matter, respondent no. 5 is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in the light of judgment of Apex Court rendered in the case of Avtar Singh (supra) within a period of two months from the date of production of a self attested copy of the order before him which may be verified from the official Website of this Court. The order impugned herein shall abide by the fresh decision, which may be taken by respondent no. 5.
Petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh representation along with necessary documents raising his grievance.
The petition is disposed of in above terms.
Order Date :- 21.1.2021
Kuldeep
