Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Bardrish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Trayambak Pratap Chandra, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 11.07.2020 lodged by opposite party no.3 as Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 0469/2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya with a further prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid F.I.R.
It has been argued by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner is neither any authority to sanction loan nor responsible for giving a "No Objection Certificate" as he was only a Branch Collection Manager in Sriram Transport Finance Company Limited and he resigned his job on 11.11.2019. He further submits that the co-accused Anoop Kumar Yadav and ors. have challenged the impugned F.I.R. in Writ Petition No.16859 (M/B) of 2020, in which they have granted interim protection by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2020, a copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition. He further submits that another co-accused Rohit Kumar Gupta and another have also challenged the impugned F.I.R. in Writ Petition No.13921 (M/B) of 2020, in which vide order dated 18.09.2020 the writ petition was disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may avail the remedy of anticipatory bail by moving an appropriate application before the Court concerned, within two weeks and for the period of two weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners. He further submits that no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner.
Lastly, the submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner just for harassment and with oblique motive, hence the present F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. She further submits that impugned F.I.R. discloses a cognizable offence against the petitioner, and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the impugned F.I.R. which discloses, cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioners.
The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.) Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Shubhankar