Allahabad High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash and set aside the charge-framing order dated 04.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, whereby, charges have been framed against Applicant under Sections 166, 120-B IPC and section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v Palvinder Singh & Others), to quash and set aside the order dated 03.07.2025 passed by the Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, whereby, discharge application preferred by the Applicant in connection with Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others) has been rejected, to quash and set aside entire as well as consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others arising out of Case Crime No. 717/2019 registered under Sections 166, 120 B IPC and Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that at the time of the alleged incident, the applicant was posted as Section Officer in the department and it is alleged that on the basis of a wrong rule, which was adhered, the whole proceeding of appointment became 2 A482 No. 8389 of 2025 unlawful and subsequently, the same was cancelled by the State Government. He submits that one, Satai Prajapati, Upper Divisional Assistant, against whom the same allegation was levelled, approached this court by way of moving Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025, wherein the coordinate Bench of this court passed the following order on 11-09-2025, whereby the criminal proceeding against him has been stayed :- "1. Heard Sri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present revision has been filed by the revisionist for the following main relief(s):- "i) Quash and set-aside the impugned order, dated 03.07.2025, passed by Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, in Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others) dismissing the Discharge Application preferred by the Revisionist; ii) Pass appropriate order discharging the Revisionist from Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v Palvinder Singh & Others) pending before Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow arising out of Case Crime No. 717/2019 registered under Sections 166, 120 B IPC and Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow;"

3. For the purposes of entertaining present revision and protecting the interest of the revisionist, this Court considered the following facts:- (i) Anand Mohan, prima-facie appears to an IAS Officer/Joint Commissioner, Department of Handloom and Textile Industries, U.P., Government, sent the requisition vide letter dated 16.01.2015 to the Secretary, U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission, Picup Bhawan, Lucknow, for making selection on total 156 vacant posts related to Group-C category. (ii) According to the aforesaid requisition dated 16.01.2015, the selection was to be made on the posts indicated therein only on the basis of interview. (iii) The U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission proceeded in the matter in terms of requisition sent by Sri Anand Mohan, the then Joint Commissioner, Department of Handloom and Textile Industries, U.P. Government. (iv) After proceeding in the selection process, a complaint was made. According to this complaint the selection ought to have been carried out on the basis of written examination as also the interview, as provided under the Rules known as 'The Uttar Pradesh Procedure For Direct Recruitment For Group 'C' Posts (Outside the Purview Of The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission),2002, Amendment in 2014, vide notification no. 20/4/2002/??-2/2014, Lucknow dated 29.01.2014. (v) The Investigating Officer (in short 'I.O.') after completion of investigation filed charge-sheet only against few persons including present applicant. (vi) It is to be noted that charge-sheet has not been filed against the Officers related to the Handloom and Textiles Industries Department. 3 A482 No. 8389 of 2025 (vii) It is also to be noted that the I.O. in various cases implicates a person only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, on being found prima-facie involved in a particular crime. (viii) It prima-facie appears that specific allegations related to attracting the offence under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short 'Act of 1988'), have not been levelled against the present revisionist.

4. Taking note of the aforesaid, this Court finds that matter requires consideration.

5. The opposite party no.1/Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home), Civil Secretariat, Lucknow is directed to file his personal affidavit in response to the present revision within three weeks.

6. The affidavit shall be filed after taking note of the facts of the case including the facts referred hereinabove. In this affidavit the concerned shall also indicate the facts related duties/ responsibilities of the concerned officers/ officials of the department in the regard to selection in issue.

7. Thereafter, learned Counsel for the respondent shall also file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks.

8. List thereafter.

9. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings, in issue, shall remain stayed qua the revisionist." He thus, submits that the present applicant is also entitled for the same relief. Learned counsel appearing for the State could not refute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter alongwith Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025. The interim protection granted in favour of Satai Prajapati vide order dated 11-09-2025 passed in Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025, shall also be available to the present applicant. September 26, 2025 AKS (Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash and set aside the charge-framing order dated 04.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, whereby, charges have been framed against Applicant under Sections 166, 120-B IPC and section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v Palvinder Singh & Others), to quash and set aside the order dated 03.07.2025 passed by the Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, whereby, discharge application preferred by the Applicant in connection with Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others) has been rejected, to quash and set aside entire as well as consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others arising out of Case Crime No. 717/2019 registered under Sections 166, 120 B IPC and Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that at the time of the alleged incident, the applicant was posted as Section Officer in the department and it is alleged that on the basis of a wrong rule, which was adhered, the whole proceeding of appointment became 2 A482 No. 8389 of 2025 unlawful and subsequently, the same was cancelled by the State Government. He submits that one, Satai Prajapati, Upper Divisional Assistant, against whom the same allegation was levelled, approached this court by way of moving Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025, wherein the coordinate Bench of this court passed the following order on 11-09-2025, whereby the criminal proceeding against him has been stayed :- "1. Heard Sri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present revision has been filed by the revisionist for the following main relief(s):- "i) Quash and set-aside the impugned order, dated 03.07.2025, passed by Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow, in Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v. Palvinder Singh & Others) dismissing the Discharge Application preferred by the Revisionist; ii) Pass appropriate order discharging the Revisionist from Criminal Case No. 1695 of 2024 (State v Palvinder Singh & Others) pending before Ld. Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act, Room No. 2, Lucknow arising out of Case Crime No. 717/2019 registered under Sections 166, 120 B IPC and Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow;"

3. For the purposes of entertaining present revision and protecting the interest of the revisionist, this Court considered the following facts:- (i) Anand Mohan, prima-facie appears to an IAS Officer/Joint Commissioner, Department of Handloom and Textile Industries, U.P., Government, sent the requisition vide letter dated 16.01.2015 to the Secretary, U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission, Picup Bhawan, Lucknow, for making selection on total 156 vacant posts related to Group-C category. (ii) According to the aforesaid requisition dated 16.01.2015, the selection was to be made on the posts indicated therein only on the basis of interview. (iii) The U.P. Subordinate Services Selection Commission proceeded in the matter in terms of requisition sent by Sri Anand Mohan, the then Joint Commissioner, Department of Handloom and Textile Industries, U.P. Government. (iv) After proceeding in the selection process, a complaint was made. According to this complaint the selection ought to have been carried out on the basis of written examination as also the interview, as provided under the Rules known as 'The Uttar Pradesh Procedure For Direct Recruitment For Group 'C' Posts (Outside the Purview Of The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission),2002, Amendment in 2014, vide notification no. 20/4/2002/??-2/2014, Lucknow dated 29.01.2014. (v) The Investigating Officer (in short 'I.O.') after completion of investigation filed charge-sheet only against few persons including present applicant. (vi) It is to be noted that charge-sheet has not been filed against the Officers related to the Handloom and Textiles Industries Department. 3 A482 No. 8389 of 2025 (vii) It is also to be noted that the I.O. in various cases implicates a person only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, on being found prima-facie involved in a particular crime. (viii) It prima-facie appears that specific allegations related to attracting the offence under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short 'Act of 1988'), have not been levelled against the present revisionist.

4. Taking note of the aforesaid, this Court finds that matter requires consideration.

5. The opposite party no.1/Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home), Civil Secretariat, Lucknow is directed to file his personal affidavit in response to the present revision within three weeks.

6. The affidavit shall be filed after taking note of the facts of the case including the facts referred hereinabove. In this affidavit the concerned shall also indicate the facts related duties/ responsibilities of the concerned officers/ officials of the department in the regard to selection in issue.

7. Thereafter, learned Counsel for the respondent shall also file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks.

8. List thereafter.

9. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings, in issue, shall remain stayed qua the revisionist." He thus, submits that the present applicant is also entitled for the same relief. Learned counsel appearing for the State could not refute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter alongwith Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025. The interim protection granted in favour of Satai Prajapati vide order dated 11-09-2025 passed in Criminal Revision No. 955 of 2025, shall also be available to the present applicant. September 26, 2025 AKS (Shree Prakash Singh,J.)