Pramod Kumar Yadav vs State Of U P And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 554 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 44
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3673 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Yadav
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

This petition has been filed with prayer to quash the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No.62 of 2022 on the ground that with similar allegations different F.I.Rs. have been lodged implicating same set of persons.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate whereas other F.I.Rs. including Case Crime No.63 of 2022 has been lodged by his peon.

Submission is that in respect of same incident multiple F.I.Rs. are being lodged which are impermissible in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supereme Court in the Case of T.T. Antony Vs. State Of Kerala & Others; (2001) 6 SCC 181.

Petition is opposed by learned A.G.A.

We have perused the F.I.Rs. in both the cases and we find that incident referred to in the two F.I.Rs., prima facie, are distinct. In Case Crime No.62 of 2022 interference in the course of Assembly Election is complained by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and an offence at 03:00 PM dated 09.03.2022 has been referred to in which 80-90 unknown persons alongwith certain named persons roughed up the government officials and also caused injuries apart from causing interference in process of election. The second F.I.R. in Case Crime No.63 of 2022 is by peon in respect of separate incident / offence allegedly caused at 01:10 P.M. on the same day in which 25-30 persons attacked the government officials and damaged various articles and papers relating to election. The F.I.R. in Case Crime No.64 of 2022 is similarly in respect of a different incident at 03:30 P.M. Merely because allegations are similar it would not mean that different F.I.Rs. can not be lodged once the incident is of different time and is caused against different State Officials separately in distinct point of time. We find that on facts of the case the judgment of Supreme Court in T.T. Antony Vs. State Of Kerala & Others (Supra) or any consequential circular issued by the state authorities would have no applicability. Since, prima facie, allegations with regard to commissioning of cognizable offences are otherwise disclosed in the F.I.R. therefore prayer made to quash it is declined. The writ petition fails and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

Dismissal of this writ petition will not preclude the petitioner from seeking appropriate protection under the Code of Criminal Procedure, which shall be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 6.4.2022

Haseen U.