Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 151438 (ALL)

SOMNATH YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

CRLP/6308/2025 · 2025-07-21

Sangeeta Chandra, Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41683-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6308 of 2025 Petitioner :- Somnath Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeta Singh Chandel,Ambrish Kumar Dubey,Ram Naresh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. who appears for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opp. Party No. 3 to conduct fair investigation of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0094/2025, U/s-316(4), 318(4), 61(2), 336(2), 338, 340(2) BNS 2023, Police Station-Vikas Nagar, District-Lucknow and also direct the opposite party no. 2 and 3 to provide the all essential videos, Key Register, Account Details and other documents from the opposite party no. 4 and 5. (ii) issue a writ of, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the opp. party no. 2 & 3 to not to the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0094/2025, U/s-316(4), 318(4), 61(2), 336(2), 338, 340(2) BNS 2023, Police Station-Vikas Nagar, District-Lucknow." 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the impugned FIR. As per prosecution story mentioned by the Area Head, Mannapuram Gold Loan, Finance Company, certain employees of the company's Branch situated at Sai Plaza, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow had committed the offence, as mentioned in the F.I.R.. The safe which contained the customer's gold ornaments was somehow opened and the ornaments wee changed and fake ornaments were placed. 4. It has been submitted that the petitioner was not posted at the said Branch. The Former Branch Head Anurag Singh and Assistant Branch Head Satish Singh had submitted their resignation and left the Branch on 01.01.2025 and after such resignation, the company had appointed one Somnath Yadav as Assistant Branch Head on 11.01.2025. On complaint being made, Audit of gold packets was made done by an Auditor and at the time of testing all the gold found in the packets were found to be correct but later on fake ornaments were found. 5. learned A.G.A. has submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable, so far as the prayer No. 1 is concerned on behalf of the accused. With regard to the prayer No.2 made in the writ petition, it has been stated that without praying for quashing of the F.I.R., the prayer for mandamus has been made directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner. 6. It is not clear from the pleadings of record, whether the person, who joined allegedly later in the company's Branch at Vikas Nagar was involved in the changing of the gold ornaments and replacing them with fake ornaments as it is a matter of investigation and collection of evidence. However, we expect the Investigating Officer to follow the provisions of paragraph 107 of Police Regulations in conducting the fair investigation in the matter. 7. This writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the Investigating Officer is bound to follow the provisions of paragraph 107 of Police Regulations in conducting any investigation. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) (Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Arvind Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench