Court No. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5209 of 2019 Petitioner :- Surendra Pal Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pravin Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; the learned A.G.A. for the respondents 1 and 2; and perused the record.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 26.11.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 1884 of 2018 at P.S. Noida Sector-20, District Gautam Budh Nagar, under Sections 408, 420, 379, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 147, 504, 506 I.P.C.
The allegation in the first information report is to the effect that the informant had a transport business. To enhance the business of the transport company, he opened an office at Noida in which the accused were also appointed in different capacities. One of the accused happens to be the petitioner, who is stated to have been appointed as Assistant Manager.
The allegation is to the effect that as many as 107 vehicles of the transport company were fraudulently engaged in different names with one HCL Company for the purpose of causing loss to the informant Company. It is alleged that by showing such false engagement, the proceeds that ought to have come to the informant's company were not deposited with the informant company as a result of which the loan instalments could not be paid thereby causing loss to the informant company.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to contend that the petitioner is not directly involved in such fraudulent engagement and otherwise also he had submitted his resignation in the year 2016. It is alleged that he has moved an application against respondent no.3 at the police station concerned though the same has not been registered as first information report.
Be that as it may, the allegations in the impugned first information report disclose commission of cognizable offences and, admittedly, the petitioner was also employee in the company at one point of time. Under the circumstances, to what extent the petitioner is involved in the crime is a matter of investigation. More over, it is well settled that, at this stage, the defence of the accused is not to be seen.
In view of the above, the prayer of the petitioner to quash the first information report cannot be accepted. The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 Sunil Kr Tiwari