Allahabad High Court
Sanjeev Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru Addl. Chief ... on 19 July, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 9
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 14975 of 2021
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Mishra
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Addl. Chief Secretary Home, Lko. & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard Shri Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.N. Tilahari, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Sanjeev Mishra, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No.1 of 2014, under Sections 420, 409 I.P.C. and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow with a further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that earlier he had approached this Court at Allahabad by filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3799 of 2021 but the same was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh before the High Court at Lucknow vide order dated 16.06.2021, a copy of the said order is annexed at Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, hence he has come up before this Court challenging the impugned F.I.R.
It has been argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a licensee of mining situated at Ahiraura, Mirzapur. In terms of the said lease, the petitioner sold the sand stone to the U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam at the working place of the petitioner i.e. at Mining Place Village Bhagauti Dei, Tehsil Chunar, District Mirzapur and loaded the sand on the trucks only and thereafter, the petitioner has no concern with the sand stone, its travelling and reaching to Lucknow for further processing of edging/carving/giving shape or whatsoever the use by the purchaser. He argued that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the impugned F.I.R., hence the impugned F.I.R. be quashed.
Per contra, learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner for quashing the impugned F.I.R. and also staying the arrest of the petitioner and argued that after due investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet against twelve accused persons and draft final report against the petitioner has also been submitted. He also argued that from the perusal of the FIR, prima facie, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out, hence, no ground exists for quashing the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has an efficacious remedy for seeking anticipatory bail in the matter before the competent Court, which has been made applicable in the State of U.P. w.e.f. 06.06.2019.
Learned AGA has also argued that the the State Government has sanctioned the prosecution of co-accused, Rajeev Kumar Singh, Heera Lal, Rakesh Chandra, Rajesh Chaudhari, Shiv Pal Singh, Bhupendra Dutt Tripathi and Shukh Lal Yadav, who were public servant, in respect of F.I.R. No. 01 of 2014, which is the impugned F.I.R. in the present case, and the said sanction order was challenged by them by filing Writ Petition Nos. 25382 of 2020 (M/B), 25759 of 2020, 25756 of 2020 (M/B), 25639 of 2020 (M/B), 25508 of 2020 (M/B), and 25453 of 2020 (M/B), respectively, before this Court and this Court, vide judgment and order dated 21.01.2021 and 17.02.2021, respectively, dismissed the aforesaid writ petitions.
Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record, it transpires from the impugned F.I.R. that it has been lodged on the basis of inquiry report of Lok Ayukta in regard to corruption and irregularities committed during the period 2007 to 2011 for supply of sandstone. It also transpires that there is embezzlement of Government exchequer of Rs.14,10,50,63,200/- and in the said loss of Government exchequer, besides former ministers, officer(s) of the State, Firms related to construction work and persons are responsible as with their connivance, the said amount has been embezzled.
Admittedly, the petitioner is the licensee of mining, who used to supply the sandstone to Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd, therefore, prima facie, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not involved in the present case as it is a categorical averment in the impugned F.I.R. that in the embezzlement of Government exchequer, apart from former ministers, officer of Nirman Agency and Government Officials, the firm related to construction work and persons are also responsible as the said embezzlement have been made with their connivance.
Keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 2021, decided on 13.04.2021) and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere in the instant writ petition.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
However, we direct the Investigating Officer to conclude the investigation and submit a police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., in accordance with law, before the competent Court, if the same has not yet been submitted, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two weeks from today.
Learned A.G.A. shall inform about this order to respondent no.2 i.e. Commissioner of Police, Varanasi, Commissionaire of Police, District Varanasi for necessary action and compliance.
(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 19.7.2021
Shubhankar
