HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2379 of 2024 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J. 1. Case called out. 2. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner to press this petition nor any request for adjournment or pass over has been made whereas learned A.G.A. for the State is present. 3. This Court had passed the following order on 04.04.2024:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. and perused the records. Present petition has been filed with the following prayer:- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 11.10.2023 registered at FIR/Case Crime No. 0035/2023, Under Section 409 IPC at Police Station S.I.T, District State STI, U.P., (so far it relates with the petitioner), as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this Writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the opposite parties not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned First Information Report dated 11.10.2023 registered at FIR/Case Crime No. 0035/2023, Under Section 409 IPC at Police Station S.I.T, District State SIT, U.P., Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No. 1 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rama Niwas Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ramesh Chandra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) to this Writ petition." The contention of the petitioner's counsel is that there is no evidence regarding commission of any offence by the petitioner nor that he is responsible for the missing records, in fact, he had not been handed over the charge of the post which he took over at the relevant time. His implication is merely on suspicion without there being anything tangible, in the form of any evidence, regarding petitioner's complicity. Learned A.G.A. already represents the official of opposite parties including the informant. Looking into the fact that the petitioner has retired from the service in 2006 and he is 78 years of age and also in view of the submissions recorded here-in-above but without drawing any conclusive opinion, we are of the opinion that unless sufficient and cogent evidence available against the petitioner regarding his complicity in the alleged crime he shall not be arrested in pursuance of the FIR impugned herein. Petitioner shall, however, get his statement recorded before the investigating officer, within one month, If he does not do so then the Investigating Officer shall file an affidavit seeking vacation of the interim order. Pleadings may be exchanged within eight weeks. List thereafter. " 4. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of telephonic instructions, submits that investigation in the matter was done by the Economic Offences Wing, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and after investigation, a report has been submitted to the Government vide letter dated 11.08.2025 and after decision by the Government, further action will be taken in the matter and a copy of the said letter is also taken on record, therefore, this petition has lost its efficacy. 5. Since no one is present on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, this petition is dismissed for non prosecution. CRLP No. 2379 of 2024 2 6. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. October 28, 2025 Saurabh CRLP No. 2379 of 2024 3 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench