Bharat Shukla @ Bharat Bhushan v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

: Anil Kumar Srivastava, Poonam Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Srivastava Court No. - 44 HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Jai Narain, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. The petitioner, who claims that he is the agent who arranged a bank loan for the informant and has nothing to do with the transaction of sale, is apparently incorrect about his stand. A reading of the FIR shows that there is a complete nexus, which is running a racket of selling plots of land not belonging to the man, who is represented to be the owner, and in the process, deceiving innocent members of the public of their hard-earned money. The Bank staff, including managers are apparently involved sanctioning loan for buying plots of land that do not belong to the vendor. In this case, the plot was ultimately sold to the first informant by one Preeti Srivastava, shown to be the vendor, after the informant raised a loan from the Central Bank of India, which is now said to be owned by the Kanpur Development Authority. The impugned FIR appears to be the tip of an organized criminal activity to cheat members of the public by offering them property without title. The fraud is made worse by getting loans sanctioned for the sale of property that apparently does not belong to the persons acting as vendors. The matter requires a thorough investigation. 2 CRLP No. 22968 of 2025 No case for interference with the impugned FIR is made out. This petition is summarily dismissed. Let this order be communicated to the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate (West), Kanpur Nagar and the Station House Officer, Police Station Panki, District Kanpur Nagar through the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar by the Registrar (Compliance). October 10, 2025 Amit (Sanjiv Kumar,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.) AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad