MANOJ KUMAR @ ANUJ AWASTHI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
CRLP/6776/2025 · 2025-07-29
Brij Raj Singh, Sangeeta Chandra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 154161 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 154161 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43569-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6776 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar @ Anuj Awasthi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Chandra Dwivedi, Mayank Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. (1) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. who appears for the Opposite party nos.1 & 2. (2) This petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following main prayers:-
"i) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned First Information Report registered at FIR / Case Crime No.165 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S. at Police Station P.G.I, District Lucknow. ii) A Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding to the Opposite party nos.1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioner in FIR / Case Crime No.165 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S. at Police Station P.G.I, District Lucknow, dated 06.04.2025 lodged by Opposite party no.3 against the petitioner." (3) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is completely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the impugned FIR. As per the admission in the FIR, the complainant had certain land situated at Village Kalli Paschim, Pargana Bijnaur, Tehsil Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow, which he had to sell and when he went to the Registrar Office and inquired and he found that the accused had sold out the land on 28.12.2015 itself by setting up an imposter. (4) It is the case of the petitioner that the Sale Deed that
was executed on 28.12.2015 has not been challenged by the informant. Also, the petitioner is some marginal witness of the alleged Sale Deed. He is not the beneficiary. (5) The learned A.G.A. has stated that unless the marginal witness would have identified the imposter to be the same person as the tenure holder, the Sale Deed could not have been executed. It has also been pointed out that two of the accused persons namely Hausila Prasad and Sarvesh Kumar Maurya have been arrested and sent to jail. The investigation is going on in the matter.
(6) This Court finds that the FIR discloses commission of cognizable of offence against the petitioner, hence, no interference is required in the matter. (7) The writ petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 29.7.2025 N.PAL Digitally signed by :- NARESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench