Allahabad High Court
Abhishek Khare vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 4 August, 2022
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Rajendra Kumar-Iv
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16385 of 2020 Petitioner :- Abhishek Khare Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record.
This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the FIR registered as Case Crime No.0266 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420 IPC and 3 & 10 Pariksha Adhinium, 1982 and 66 & 66-D Information Technology Amended Act, 2008, Police Station Industrial Area, District Prayagraj on the ground that the FIR allegations are absolutely false.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the previous order passed by this Court on 21.01.2021 which is reproduced herein below :-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"i. issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 06.10.2020 registered in Case Crime No.0266 of 2020 under Section 419, 420 IPC, 3 & 10 Pariksha Adhinium 1982 and 66 & 66-D Information Technology amended Act 2008, P.S. Industrial Area District Prayagraj.
ii. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities not to arrest the petitioner in Case Crime No.0266 of 2020 under Section 419, 420 IPC, 3 & 10 Pariksha Adhinium 1982 police station Industrial Area District Prayagraj."
As per the impugned First Information Report, the informant STF received information on 5.10.2020 at Civil Lines that 'CCC' examination is going on at Examination Centre Chandrakala Universal Private Ltd., Industrial Area Naini with the help of solvers and if immediate action is taken then the culprits may be caught. As per the F.I.R. version respondent No.3 along with Chauki Incharge, Sandawa Police Booth, Sub Inspector Sri B.N. Pandey and other police personnel reached the aforesaid Institution and found that on the first floor examination of 'CCC' was going on. They reached on the second floor, where the petitioner and 12 other persons were found allegedly involved in solving papers online. A search was made on 3-00 A.M. on 6.10.2020 and the petitioner and 12 other persons were arrested on 3--00 A.M. on 6.10.2020. The First Information Report was registered as F.I.R. No.266 dated 6.10.2020 at 7:51 hours.
Learned A.G.A. submits that some time may be granted to obtain instructions and to bring on record the following facts:
(i) Time Schedule and date of the examination of 'CCC' in question which was being conducted by National Institution of Electronics and Information Technology(NIELIT)earlier known as DOEACC.
(ii) The date and time of arrest of students, if any.
(iii) Particulars of G.D with regard to rawangi and amad of police personnel in the matter of the search in question, who accompanied respondent no.3 as per the impugned First Information Report.
Put up on 25.01.2021 as fresh."
On the basis of aforesaid observation, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the FIR is absolutely false inasmuch as the search was made at 03:00 AM which was not the time during which the examination itself was scheduled. It is also contended that the FIR allegations otherwise are wholly improbable.
Pursuant to the above observation of this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 stating that the accused petitioner was present in the premises of Chandrakala Centre at 03:00 to 03:15 PM when police raided the examination centre on 05.01.2020 at 03:00 PM. Petitioner is alleged to have been impersonating in place of one Vinod Kumar Gupta. The video recording as well as photographs of the accused applicant are stated to be available with the respondents and such material are also annexed along-with the counter affidavit. In paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the examination was conducted in four shifts, namely, B1 (08:30 to 10:00 AM), B2 (11:00 AM to 12:30 PM), B3 (02:00 to 03:30 PM) and B4 (04:30 to 06:00 PM). It is also asserted that the STF official left for the institution after registering his entry in the G.D. Report No.03 on 05.10.2020 at 10:10 AM. It is also been stated that the process of examination concluded by 03:30 PM by when the police reached and about 100 - 200 students left after conclusion of the examination. It is also stated that there was a shut down in the supply of the electricity for about 4 to 5 hours. It is also been stated that 14 accused persons have been arrested and handed over to the police out of which 13 are solvers while the 14th person was the manager.
A rejoinder affidavit has been filed in reply to the aforesaid counter affidavit stating that aforesaid assertions are wrong and that the photographs annexed do not specifically disclosed the time, on screen.
We have perused the records of the writ petition including the FIR which contains an elaborate narration of facts about examination being conducted in the centre concerned by 13 solvers by using the ID of other persons. The computer screen was found open and various recoveries have also been made on the spot from the arrested persons. Along-with the counter affidavit various photographs have also been annexed.
From the materials that have been placed on record, we find that prima-facie commissioning of cognizable offence is clearly disclosed in the matter and elaborate defence of the petitioner is not required to be examined at this stage, particularly as the investigation is still pending.
Law is otherwise settled that writ proceedings cannot be converted into a mini trial so as to verify the veracity of the FIR allegations or to consider the defence of the accused in the matter. These are aspects which are required to be determined at the stage of investigation / trial.
Since prima-facie commissioning of cognizable offence is disclosed in the matter, we refuse the prayer made in the writ petition for quashing the FIR.
Writ petition, accordingly, is dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.8.2022 I.A.Siddiqui