HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21838 of 2025 Court No. - 42 HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Mr. Udayan Nandan along with Mr.Saksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State. A perusal of the impugned F.I.R. shows that the principal accused Pawan Kumar has siphoned off the funds relating to the Electricity Corporation in his account and that of some other employees of the Corporation, which includes the petitioner, Deepak Chauhan @ Chhinga, a sweeper, posted in the office of the Managing Director, Dakshinanchal Vidhyuyt Vitran Nigam Ltd. The allegation is that in the petitioner's account, a sum of Rs. 34,57,743/- were transferred. Mr. Udayan Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner very persuasively argued to say that the sum that was remitted in his account is not Rs. 34, 57,783/- but merely a figure of Rs. 18,01,571/-. He has drawn the Court's attention to the bank statement of the petitioner's account annexed at page 45 of the paper book. On 7th October, 2024, a sum of Rs. 2,82,259/- was credited. Later on, on 1st January, 2025 a sum of Rs. 3,18,155/- was credited. These credits were from the Corporation account. On 4th March, 2025 a sum of Rs. 5,27,824/- was credited and the last entry, at page no. 76 of the paper book dated 3rd June, 2025, shows credit of a sum of Rs. 6,73,292/-. This aggregates to a figure of Rs. 18 lacs and odd. Mr. Udayan Nandan further pointed out that a sum of Rupees One Lac has been remitted to the corporation. The issue is not what the petitioner has remitted or what precisely is the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Saksham Srivastava, Udayan Nandan Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Deepak Chauhan Alias Chhinga .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) sum of money that he has received. The question is that he has acted as a accessory and abettor to the main accused, Pawan Kumar who has siphoned off the funds of the Corporation into the personal accounts of employees, including the petitioner. It is a stratagem through which funds of the Corporation would be siphoned off and the exchequer deprived of it. This is a very serious financial matter. We do not consider it fit to interfere at this stage of investigation by extending any kind of relief. No case for interference is made out. The writ petition fails and is summarily dismissed. September 24, 2025 Kumar Manish CRLP No. 21838 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad