Suman Pandey And 3 Others v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 30 May 2025
- Bench
- MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, ANIL KUMARX
Provisions considered
Judgment
Heard Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for the State-respondent.
This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the First Information Report dated 23.3.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0115 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) 61(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and there is false implication in the instant case. They are working on different posts in Tata Capital Ltd., which is a company duly incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. As there were allegations of misconduct/discrepancy deposit/misappropriation of funds against the informant, who is also an employee of the said company, disciplinary proceeding initiated against him and later on his services were dispensed by the company vide termination order dated 22.10.2024. In this background of the matter and in attempt to camouflage his own misdeeds and with an endeavor to circumvent recovery of the amount misappropriated by the informant, the impugned FIR is lodged alleging therein Rs. 77,061/- had been usurped by the petitioners by hacking into the software of the company. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this backdrop, vehemently contended that the action of the informant in lodging the FIR is not only an abuse of process of law but is also by way of a counterblast as regards not only the termination of his services but also to the demand notice dated 13.12.2024. In case, no reprieve is accorded by this Court, the petitioners would suffer irreparable loss and injury.
Matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to the respondent No. 3 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week.
All the respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. Petitioners shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List immediately thereafter.
Until further orders, the petitioners shall not be arrested pursuant to the impugned First Information Report provided they cooperate in the investigation. (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Order Date :- 30.5.2025 A.K.Srivastava
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Companies Act, 2013.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 30 May 2025. The bench was MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, ANIL KUMARX.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.