Manish Kumar Maurya v. State of UP and Ors.)

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4513 of 2024 Applicant :- Manish Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- Deepak Kumar Singh, Circle Officer P.S- Mishrikh Sitapur Counsel for Applicant :- Braj Nandan Yadav,Abhimanyu Singh,Jaskaran Lal Maurya,Shailendra Singh Rajawat Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the opposite party.

2. The present application has been filed with the prayer to summon and punish the opposite party for willful and deliberate defiance of order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 (Manish Kumar Maurya Vs. State of UP and Ors.).

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was cheated by Monu Kumar (Village Pradhan) and his associates in the name of selling the property. He further submits that the applicant purchased the property in question which was proposed by Monu Kumar and handed over the cheque of Rs.5,00,000/- but after two days, they requested for cash then the applicant managed the cash of Rs.5,00,000/- and gave the same to Monu Kumar. Thereafter, it came into the notice of the applicant that the seller of property was not the recorded tenure holder of the property in question then the applicant lodged FIR No.297 of 2024 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, PS- Mishrikh District- Sitapur and the investigation of aforesaid case is still going on.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that Monu Kumar with the association of police personals, only with the intention to make pressure on the applicant for withdrawal of the proceeding of the aforesaid case, lodged FIR No.305 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, PS- Mishrikh, District- Sitapur against the applicant on the complaint of one Amrita (Cousin sister of Monu Kumar) as the property in question was owned by her husband.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that the applicant preferred Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 for quashing of the FIR No.305/2024 (supra), in which, the interim order was passed by the Writ Court on 22.10.2024 with the observation that till the next date of listing, applicant shall not be arrested on the basis of impugned FIR, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. It was also observed that in case, the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation then this can be a ground for seeking vacation of the interim order.

6. Order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 is as under: "1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of opposite party no.4 by Ms. Vandana Singh, Advocate, is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report dated 05.10.2024 F.I.R./Case Crime No. 305 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station Mishrit, District Sitapur 4. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the impugned F.I.R. He submits that the petitioner had purchased land, bearing Gata No. 18/8 area 0.486 hectare and Gata No. 18/15 area 0.376 hectare situated in village Sahsiyamau, Pargana Aurangabad, Tehsil Mishrikh, district Sitapur from one Saktu through Gram Pradhan of the village vide registered sale deed dated 20.06.2024. According to the learned Counsel, at the time of execution of the said sale deed, the petitioner was not aware about the facts that the said purchaser is imposter of original Sakatu, however, on coming to know this fact, the petitioner has immediately filed a case, bearing Civil Case No. 580 of 2024 : Manish Kumar Maurya vs. Sakatu and others, under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act for cancellation of the said sale deed dated 20.06.2024 before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sitapur and the same is pending. 5. On being confronted, learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to paragraph-12 of the petition, in which it has been stated by the petitioner that the petitioner is not claiming any right or title upon the above said land and he is not in possession over the land in dispute. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent have also agreed to settle the dispute by filing compromise in Civil Case No. 580 of 2024. 7. In case compromise is being filed within three weeks, the Court concerned is expected to decide Civil Case No. 580 of 2024 within a period of two months thereafter. 8. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner has stated in para-12 of the petition that the petitioner is not claiming any right or title over the land in dispute on the basis of the said sale deed dated 20.06.2024 and he is not in possession over the land in dispute, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. The petitioner shall, however, co-operate in the investigation and get his statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called. If he does not do so then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order. 9. List after three months, showing the name of Ms. Vandana Singh as Counsel for the opposite party no.4 in the cause list. 10. In the meanwhile, parties may exchange pleadings. "

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further draws attention of this Court on the photo-graphs annexed with the contempt application as Annexure No.11 and submits that the applicant was taken into custody by the police on 06.11.2024 and he was confined in the lock-up for about 3 hours between 10:30 AM to 02:30 PM. Thereafter, present application was preferred. The applicant was again arrested by the police on 24.12.2024 and sent to jail on the ground that he was not cooperating in the investigation, which is a clear violation of the order of Writ Court passed on 22.10.2024. Therefore, opposite party should be summoned and punished accordingly.

8. Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the applicant issued cheque amounting Rs.5,00,000/- as sale consideration but at the same time, in his account, balance was only of Rs.61.98/-, therefore, the intention of the applicant to cheat the recorded tenure holder was clear.

9. Specific question was asked from learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, as to what was the credible evidence available in the case diary when the applicant was taken into custody but he is unable to show the same.

10. Considering the submissions of counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, order of Writ Court, photo-graphs and the affidavits filed by opposite party as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that there was an interim direction of Writ Court dated 22.10.2024, by which, the arrest of the applicant was stayed and it was also observed that in case, the applicant failed to cooperate in the investigation then it can be a ground for seeking vacation of the interim order but in the present case, applicant was taken into custody on the ground that he was not cooperating in the investigation.

11. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to file application annexing the certified copy of this order before the Additional Director General, Anti-Corruption Organization, UP, Lucknow within a period of one month from today. In case, any application is moved then it is expected from the aforesaid Officer to set up an inquiry and take appropriate action against the erring officer and also submit the inquiry report along with the affidavit before this Court by the next date.

12. List this case on 06.10.2025 for filing affidavit of compliance. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 V. Sinha

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4513 of 2024 Applicant :- Manish Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- Deepak Kumar Singh, Circle Officer P.S- Mishrikh Sitapur Counsel for Applicant :- Braj Nandan Yadav,Abhimanyu Singh,Jaskaran Lal Maurya,Shailendra Singh Rajawat Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the opposite party.

2. The present application has been filed with the prayer to summon and punish the opposite party for willful and deliberate defiance of order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 (Manish Kumar Maurya Vs. State of UP and Ors.).

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was cheated by Monu Kumar (Village Pradhan) and his associates in the name of selling the property. He further submits that the applicant purchased the property in question which was proposed by Monu Kumar and handed over the cheque of Rs.5,00,000/- but after two days, they requested for cash then the applicant managed the cash of Rs.5,00,000/- and gave the same to Monu Kumar. Thereafter, it came into the notice of the applicant that the seller of property was not the recorded tenure holder of the property in question then the applicant lodged FIR No.297 of 2024 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, PS- Mishrikh District- Sitapur and the investigation of aforesaid case is still going on.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that Monu Kumar with the association of police personals, only with the intention to make pressure on the applicant for withdrawal of the proceeding of the aforesaid case, lodged FIR No.305 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, PS- Mishrikh, District- Sitapur against the applicant on the complaint of one Amrita (Cousin sister of Monu Kumar) as the property in question was owned by her husband.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that the applicant preferred Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 for quashing of the FIR No.305/2024 (supra), in which, the interim order was passed by the Writ Court on 22.10.2024 with the observation that till the next date of listing, applicant shall not be arrested on the basis of impugned FIR, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. It was also observed that in case, the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation then this can be a ground for seeking vacation of the interim order.

6. Order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.7955 of 2024 is as under: "1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of opposite party no.4 by Ms. Vandana Singh, Advocate, is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report dated 05.10.2024 F.I.R./Case Crime No. 305 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station Mishrit, District Sitapur 4. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the impugned F.I.R. He submits that the petitioner had purchased land, bearing Gata No. 18/8 area 0.486 hectare and Gata No. 18/15 area 0.376 hectare situated in village Sahsiyamau, Pargana Aurangabad, Tehsil Mishrikh, district Sitapur from one Saktu through Gram Pradhan of the village vide registered sale deed dated 20.06.2024. According to the learned Counsel, at the time of execution of the said sale deed, the petitioner was not aware about the facts that the said purchaser is imposter of original Sakatu, however, on coming to know this fact, the petitioner has immediately filed a case, bearing Civil Case No. 580 of 2024 : Manish Kumar Maurya vs. Sakatu and others, under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act for cancellation of the said sale deed dated 20.06.2024 before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sitapur and the same is pending. 5. On being confronted, learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to paragraph-12 of the petition, in which it has been stated by the petitioner that the petitioner is not claiming any right or title upon the above said land and he is not in possession over the land in dispute. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent have also agreed to settle the dispute by filing compromise in Civil Case No. 580 of 2024. 7. In case compromise is being filed within three weeks, the Court concerned is expected to decide Civil Case No. 580 of 2024 within a period of two months thereafter. 8. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner has stated in para-12 of the petition that the petitioner is not claiming any right or title over the land in dispute on the basis of the said sale deed dated 20.06.2024 and he is not in possession over the land in dispute, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him. The petitioner shall, however, co-operate in the investigation and get his statement recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called. If he does not do so then it can be made a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order. 9. List after three months, showing the name of Ms. Vandana Singh as Counsel for the opposite party no.4 in the cause list. 10. In the meanwhile, parties may exchange pleadings. "

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further draws attention of this Court on the photo-graphs annexed with the contempt application as Annexure No.11 and submits that the applicant was taken into custody by the police on 06.11.2024 and he was confined in the lock-up for about 3 hours between 10:30 AM to 02:30 PM. Thereafter, present application was preferred. The applicant was again arrested by the police on 24.12.2024 and sent to jail on the ground that he was not cooperating in the investigation, which is a clear violation of the order of Writ Court passed on 22.10.2024. Therefore, opposite party should be summoned and punished accordingly.

8. Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that the applicant issued cheque amounting Rs.5,00,000/- as sale consideration but at the same time, in his account, balance was only of Rs.61.98/-, therefore, the intention of the applicant to cheat the recorded tenure holder was clear.

9. Specific question was asked from learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, as to what was the credible evidence available in the case diary when the applicant was taken into custody but he is unable to show the same.

10. Considering the submissions of counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, order of Writ Court, photo-graphs and the affidavits filed by opposite party as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that there was an interim direction of Writ Court dated 22.10.2024, by which, the arrest of the applicant was stayed and it was also observed that in case, the applicant failed to cooperate in the investigation then it can be a ground for seeking vacation of the interim order but in the present case, applicant was taken into custody on the ground that he was not cooperating in the investigation.

11. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to file application annexing the certified copy of this order before the Additional Director General, Anti-Corruption Organization, UP, Lucknow within a period of one month from today. In case, any application is moved then it is expected from the aforesaid Officer to set up an inquiry and take appropriate action against the erring officer and also submit the inquiry report along with the affidavit before this Court by the next date.

12. List this case on 06.10.2025 for filing affidavit of compliance. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 V. Sinha