Dwarika Prasad vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11081 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Reserved on:24.03.2023
 
Delivered on:13.04.2023
 
Court No. - 46
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4530 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Dwarika Prasad
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Bahadur Singh,P.K. Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

Delivered by Hon'ble Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

The writ petition seeks quashing of the F.I.R. dated 12.12.2022 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0004 of 2022, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Section 13(1)(a) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amendment Act, 2018), Police Station- Bareilly Sector, District- Bareilly.

As per the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner and the allegations in the First Information Report, an open enquiry was conducted by the Vigilance Department against the petitioner who was posted as Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Saidpur, Budaun and other co-accused who in connivance committed various financial irregularities in purchase of two wheeler water tanker for which a tender notice was published in the daily newspaper and Rs. 3,00,960/- was paid to the Contractor Abdul Hakeem and sons on 11.03.2015. According to the Stock Register dated 11.03.2015, only one water tanker was shown to be purchased. It has also been alleged that in regard to the work order of construction, five work orders were placed, but six bills were raised by the concerned contractor. These tenders were granted to a Contractor whose identity could not be traced and was therefore a non-existent contractor.

Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the order dated 23.12.2022 placed as Annexure No. '2' to the writ petition passed by the Coordinate Bench in Criminal Misc. Writ petition No. 20173 of 2022 (Bhoopram Verma vs. State of UP and 2 Others) seeking similar relief.

Reliance was also placed on the Constitution Bench decision of the Apex Court in Neeraj Dutta vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) 2023 AIR (Supreme Court) 330.

Per contra, learned AGA for the State stated that from the bare perusal of the FIR, a cognizable offence is made out. In the order passed by the Coordinate Bench, the role of the petitioner therein was of inviting the tenders and of issuing the work orders. As far as to the judgment referred above, the same is distinguishable on facts and not applicable at the stage of investigation.

Thus, upon hearing counsel for the parties and upon a perusal of the record, we find that the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner are his defence, which cannot be looked into while dealing with a writ petition seeking quashing of a first information report.

Moreover, the allegations made in the First Information Report clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences and the allegations are serious in nature. Therefore, prayer of the petitioner to quash the First Information Report is completely misconceived and is rejected.

The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail/anticipatory bail.

Order Date :- 13.4.2023

Shivani