# Vishal Gupta v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2021) 9 ILRA 353
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-02-12
- **Case number:** Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 6295 of 2021
- **Bench:** Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Piyush Agrawal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/vishal-gupta-v-state-of-u-p-ors-47577
- **Pages:** 8

## Headnote

A. Criminal Law - Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1950 - Article 226 - Indian
Penal Code, 1860-Sections 420, 188 &
Copy right Act, 1957-Section 63-quashing
of FIR-the petitioner was carrying 8
bundle of betel-nuts and tobacco-On
354 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
being
asked
by
the
informant
Sub-
Inspector, the petitioner could not show
valid papers relating to transportation of
betel-nuts
and
tobacco-none
of
the
ingredients of cheating is reflected nor the
petitioner disobeyed the public servant,
Thus prima facie bare reading of FIR no
offence is made out u/s 420/188 IPCallegation of commission of offence u/s 63
Copyright Act is prima facie not made outit appears to be malicious and grave abuse
of power by the informant Sub-Inspectorif the goods were not accompanied by
proper documents for transportation, it is
only the authorities under the U.P. Goods
and Service Tax Act, 2017, are empowered
to check and take action-police has no
authority to check invoices etc. and
accounting
the
goods
during
transportation. (Para 1 to 10)

The writ petition is disposed off. (E-6)

## Text

9 All. Vishal Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
353
effective nor purposeful nor objective nor
fair,
the
courts
may
if
considered
necessary, may order fair investigation,
further investigation or reinvestigation as
the case may be to discover the truth so as
to prevent miscarriage of justice. However,
no hard and fast rules as such can be
prescribed by way of uniform and universal
invocation and decision shall depend upon
facts and circumstances of each case.

33. Fair and proper investigation is
the primary duty of the investigating
officer. In every civilized society, the
police force is invested with powers of
investigation
of
a
crime
to
secure
punishment for the criminal and it is in the
interest of the society that the investigating
agency must act honestly and fairly and not
resort to fabricating false evidence or
creating false clues only with a view to
secure conviction because such acts shake
the confidence of the common man not
only in the investigating agency but in the
ultimate
analysis
in
the
system
of
dispensation of criminal justice. Proper
result must be obtained by recourse to
proper means, otherwise it would be an
invitation to anarchy, vide Rampal Pithwa
Rahidas vs. State of Maharastra 1994
Suppl, (2) SCC 73 (para-37). Investigation
must be fair and effective and must proceed
in the right direction in consonance with
the ingredients of the offence and not in a
haphazard manner moreso in serious case.
Proper and fair investigation on the part of
the investigating officer is the backbone of
rule of law vide Sasi Thomas vs. State
(2006) 12 SCC 421 (para-15 and 18).

34. Therefore, considering the fact
and circumstances of the case in its entirety
and
applying
the
principles
of
law
aforenoted, we direct the respondent no.5
to investigate forthwith in FIR No.
0038/2021,
dated
12.02.2021
under
Sections 302, 394, 452 & 504 I.P.C. P.S. -
Baksa, District - Jaunpur, and accordingly
investigation
is
transferred/entrusted
forthwith to the respondent No.5. The
respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 shall ensure that
the entire evidences and papers relating to
the aforesaid case crime/FIR are transferred
to Investigating Officer of the respondent
No.5 for investigation. An affidavit of
compliance shall be filed on behalf of the
respondent no.5 and also by the Staterespondents on or before the next date
fixed.

35. Put up as a fresh case on
20.09.2021 at 02:00 P.M. before this
bench for further hearing.
----------
(2021)09ILR A353
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 25.08.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SURYA PRAKASH
KESARWANI, J.
THE HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.

Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 6295 of 2021

Vishal Gupta ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for the Respondents:
A.G.A.

A. Criminal Law - Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1950 - Article 226 - Indian
Penal Code, 1860-Sections 420, 188 &
Copy right Act, 1957-Section 63-quashing
of FIR-the petitioner was carrying 8
bundle of betel-nuts and tobacco-On
354 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
being
asked
by
the
informant
Sub-
Inspector, the petitioner could not show
valid papers relating to transportation of
betel-nuts
and
tobacco-none
of
the
ingredients of cheating is reflected nor the
petitioner disobeyed the public servant,
Thus prima facie bare reading of FIR no
offence is made out u/s 420/188 IPCallegation of commission of offence u/s 63
Copyright Act is prima facie not made outit appears to be malicious and grave abuse
of power by the informant Sub-Inspectorif the goods were not accompanied by
proper documents for transportation, it is
only the authorities under the U.P. Goods
and Service Tax Act, 2017, are empowered
to check and take action-police has no
authority to check invoices etc. and
accounting
the
goods
during
transportation. (Para 1 to 10)

The writ petition is disposed off. (E-6)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Surya Prakash
Kesarwani, J.
&
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal, J.)

1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava,
learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
M.C.
Chaturvedi,
learned
Additional
Advocate General assisted by Sri Shiv
Kumar Pal, learned Government Advocate,
Sri Rishi Chaddha, Sri A.K. Sand and Sri
Patanjali Mishra, learned A.G.As. for the
State-respondents.

2. On 13.08.2021 and 24.08.2021, this
court passed the following orders:-

"Order Dated 13.08.2021

Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned A.G.A. for State
respondents.

On oral request of Learned
counsel for the petitioner, "Sub Inspector
Kedar Singh, Police Station- Nadi Gaon,
District- Jalaun" i.e. informant, is allowed
to be impleaded as respondent no. 3.

Notice
on
behalf
of
newly
impleaded respondent no. 3 has been
accepted by the learned A.G.A.

This writ petition has been filed
praying for the following reliefs:-

"(a) Issue a writ order or
direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing the first information report dated
20.02.2021, registered as Case Crime No.
0015 of 2021 under section 420, 188 I.P.C.
& section 63 Copy right act police station
Nandi Gaon District Jalaun.

(b) Issue a writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents not to arrest
the petitioner which is registered in Case
Crime No. 0015 of 2021 under section 420,
188 I.P.C. & section 63 Copy right act
police station Nandi Gaon District Jalaun.

(c) Issue a writ order or direction
in the nature of mandamus commanding
the concerned respondents authority to not
adopt any coercive measure against the
petitioners in the above mentioned case."

The impugned first information
report No. 0015/2021 dated 22.02.2021,
under Sections 420, 188 IPC and Section
63 of Copy Right Act, 1957, Police Station
Nadi Gaon, District Jalaun is reproduced:-

"र्दा बरामदगी 05 वोरी मे महादेव
ब्राड कटी सुपाडी पैकेट में व 03 बोरी मे
महादेव गोड अनननमानत तबाकू पैकेट मे
नाजायज व नगरफ्तारी एक नर्र अनभयुि
अिगात धारा 420/188 आई.पी.सी व 63 कापी
राइट अनधननयम 1957 आज नदनािंक 20-2-21
को मै उ०नन० केदार नसिंह मय हमराह का०
1258 तेजवीर नसिंह व का० 756नजतेन्द्र नसह के
थाना हाजा से वहवाले र०निं० 30 समय 18.37
बजे रवाना होकर वास्ते नववेचना व जािंच
अहकामात व गस्त मे कस्बा नदीगािंव मे नावली
नतराहा कोच रोड पर मौजूद थे नक जररये
9 All. Vishal Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
355
मुखनबर खास सूचना नमली नक एक सर्ेद
ओमनी बैन गाडी मे अवैध सुपाडी व तबाकू
गुटका कही ले जाया जा रहा है गाडी परासनी
गािंव की तरर् से आने वाली है।और मुखनवर
बताकर चला गया नक इस सूचना पर नवश्वास
करके नघलौर मोड पहुूँचकर आसनाह राह से
गवाहान र्राहम करने की कोनशश की गई तो
रानत्र व सुनसान स्थान होने के कारण कोई
गवाहान र्राहम नही हो सका नक थोडी देर
बाद परासनी गािंव की ओर से एक ओमनी गाडी
आती हुई नदखाई नदया नजसे हम लोगो द्वारा
नघलौर मोड पर ही हाथ का इशारा देकर रोका
गया तो गाडी रोक कर चालक को उतार कर
नाम पता पूिंिते हुए गाडी की जामा तलाशी व
चेनकिंग की गयी तो गाडी ओमिी सफेद में आगे
रधजस्ट्रेशि ि० UP 92 N 1998 अिंनकत होना
पाया गया तथा चालक ने अपना नाम नवशाल
गुप्ता पुत्र राजू गुप्ता नन० कस्बा व थाना रेढर
जनपद जालौन बताया तथा ओमनी गाडी के
अन्दर चेक नकया गया तो आि बण्डल सुपाडी
व िम्बाक भर बोररयों के बण्डल मौज द धमले
सुपाडी व िम्बाक पररवहि करिे का
लाइसेंस चालक से मागा गया िो चालक िहीं
धदिा सका एव अपिा डराईवरी लाइसेंस व
गाडी के कागजाि िहीं धदिा सका च धक
बरामद सामग्री है इस कारण खाद्य सुरक्षा
अनधकारी कोच को जररये मोबाइल अवगत
कराया गया कुि समय पचात श्री राहुल शमाा
मय खाद्य सहायक सुरक्षा अनधकारी श्री
रमेशचन्द्र मौके पर उपन्तस्थत हुए नजसके द्वारा
गाडी मे भरी सुपाडी गुटका व िम्बाक को
चेक धकया गया िो सुपाडी पैकेट में बैच ि०
धिमािण धिधथ व ननमााता का पता व कम्पनी का
रनजस्टरेशन नबर आनद अिंनकत न पाये जाने के
कारण अवैध बताया गया तथा अवैध सुपाडी
गुटका की एक चोरी से वंद पैकेट बिौर िम िा
िाद्य अधिकारी िी राहुल शमाि द्वारा अपने
कब्जे में जािंच कराने हेतु नलया गया एक पैकेट में
12 पाउच भरे है। वोररयोिं को खोलकर मेरे द्वारा
भी देखा गया तो चार बोररयोिं में पािंच झोलें भरे
नमले नजसमें एक झोले में 10 पैकेट तथा एक
पैकेट में 12 पाउच सुपाडी महीन कटी भरी पाई
गई तथा पािंचवी वोरी में तीन झोले भरे नमले
नजसमें एक झोले में 10 पैकेट नजसमें एक, पैकेट
में 12 पाउच कटी सुपाडी महीन भरी पाई गई
नजसमें से एक बोरी से 4 पैकेट सुपाडी महीन
कटी हुई अपने कब्जे में जािंच हेतु बतौर नमूना
नलया गया पाउच को खोलकर देखा गया तो
लाल हरी पन्नी का पाउच है नजसमें एक तरर्
असली उरई वालोिं की सुप्रीम िी महादेव शुद्ध
सुपाडी दाना तथा दूसरी तरर् असली उरई
वालो की सुप्रीम सोने जैसे िरा KANTHA शुद्ध
सुपाडी दाना नमश्रण सुपाडी लोिंग इलाइची
ननमााता
नदव्या
केनमकल
GSTIK-09AKY
PG8617L1Z-9 नजसमें एक वोरी में 04 पैकेट
तथा दो वोररयोिं में 6-6 पैकेट नजसमें एक पैकेट
में 15-15 पाउच भरे है तथा चार पैकेट वाली
बोरी में 25-25 पाउच िम्बाक के पाये गये
तबाकू के पाउच लाल हरी व गोडन पन्नी का है
नजसमें एक तरर् तबाकू में ददानाक मौद होती
है आज ही िोडे काल करें 1800-11-2356
असली महादेव पन्नी का अनननमात तबाकू
अिंनकत है। तथा दूसरी तरर् अिंग्रेजी में
TOBACCO CAUSES PAINFUL DEATH
MRP1-00 PACKD BY DC TRADIMG
COMPANY तुलसी नगर उरई जालौन GSTIN
09B2FPG5590JIZQ MAHADAV अिंनकत है
तथा तबाकू पाउच में बैंच न० ननमााण नतनथ
ननमााता का पता व कम्पनी का रनजस्टरेशन न०
आनद न पाये जाने के कारण िम्बाक को बोरी
से एक 2 पैकेट बिोर िम िा परीक्षण हेिु
धलया गया शेि सभी माल को उन्ही बोररयों में
भरकर धसलकर सविमुहर कर िम िा मुहर
िैयार धकया गया अधभयुक्त धवशाल गुप्ता
उपरोक्त को मय बरामद माल सुपाडी व
तबाकू मय गाडी के समय करीब 21.30 कब्जा
पुनलस में नलया गया गाडी के कागजात न होने
के कारण/सवारी गाडी मे अवैध माल ढोने के
356 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
कारण अिगता धारा 207 M.V.ACT में सीज
की जाती है। तथा अनभयुि को अवैध सुपाडी
गुटका व तबाकू के पररवहन के सबि में वेद
कागजात न नदखाये जाने व प्रवनचत होने व
नकसी कम्पनी की नकल करने (नदब्या
केनमकल्स) आनद पर जुमा धारा 420/188 IPC व
63 कापी राइट अनध० से अवगत कराया गया।
र्दा टाचो की रोशनी में मौके पर तैयार की गई
र्दा को पढकर सुनाकर हमराही कमा०गण व
अनभयुि के हस्ताक्षऱ कराये गये व मौके पर
नगरफ्तारी प्रपत्र तैयार नकया गया। दोरान
नगरफ्तारी मा० सवोच्य न्याया० व मानवनधकार
आयोग के आदेशो-ननदेशोिं का अक्षरशः पालन
नकया गया। नगरफ्तारी की सूचना अनभयुि के
पररवारी जन को थाने पहुिंच कर उनचत माध्यम
से दी जायेगी। एसडी अपठनीय SI 20/2/21
(केदार धसंह) थािा िदीगांव एसडी Vishal
एसडी का० 1528 तेजवीर नसिंह एसजी का०
नजतेन्द्र नोट- र्दा की एक प्रनत अनभयुिोिं को
दी गई। एसडी अपठनीय SI 20/2/21 (केदार
नसिंह) थाना नदीगािंव एसडी Vishal नवशाल"

In paragraph 8 of the writ petition
it has been stated that the petitioner is
engaged in supply of goods in market. As per
allegations in the impugned first information
report, the petitioner was carrying 8 bundle
of betel-nuts and tobacco. The only allegation
in the impugned first information report is
that on being asked by the informant Sub
Inspector, the petitioner could not show valid
papers relating to transportation of betel-nuts
and tobacco and for that reason the
impugned first information report has been
registered under Sections 420/188 IPC and
Section 63 of the Copy Right Act, 1957.
Sections 188, 415 and 420 I.P.C. read as
under:-

"188. Disobedience to order duly
promulgated by public servant.-Whoever,
knowing that, by an order promulgated by
a public servant lawfully empowered to
promulgate such order, he is directed to
abstain from a certain act, or to take
certain order with certain property in his
possession or under his management,
disobeys such direction,

shall, if such disobedience causes
or tends to cause obstruction, annoyance or
injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or
injury, to any person lawfully employed, be
punished with simple imprisonment for a
term which may extend to one month or
with fine which may extend to two hundred
rupees, or with both;

and if such disobedience causes
or trends to cause danger to human life,
health or safety, or causes or tends to cause
a riot or affray, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to six months, or
with fine which may extend to one thousand
rupees, or with both."

"415.
Cheating.-Whoever,
by
deceiving any person, fraudulently or
dishonestly induces the person so deceived
to deliver any property to any person, or to
consent that any person shall retain any
property, or intentionally induces the
person so deceived to do or omit to do
anything which he would not do or omit if
he were not so deceived, and which act or
omission causes or is likely to cause
damage or harm to that person in body,
mind, reputation or property, is said to
"cheat"."

"420. Cheating and dishonestly
inducing delivery of property.- Whoever
cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the
person deceived to deliver any property to
any person, or to make, alter or destroy the
whole or any part of a valuable security, or
anything which is signed or sealed, and
which is capable of being converted into a
valuable security, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to seven years, and
shall also be liable to fine."
9 All. Vishal Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
357

Basic ingredient of cheating is
whoever,
by
deceiving
any
person,
fraudulently or dishonestly induces the
person so deceived to deliver any property
to any person, or to consent that any
person shall retain any property, or
intentionally
induces
the
person
so
deceived to do or omit to do anything
which he would not do or omit if he were
not so deceived, and which act or omission
causes or is likely to cause damage or
harm to that person in body, mind,
reputation or property. None of the
ingredients of cheating, as defined under
Section 415 is reflected from the impugned
first information report.

That apart, the basic requirement
of presence of two persons is also absent.
Since the alleged act does not prima facie
falls within the meaning of word "cheating",
consequently no case is made out under
Section 420 I.P.C. on bare reading of the
impugned first information report. Section
188 I.P.C. relates to disobedience of the
order promulgated by a public servant. There
is no allegation in the impugned first
information report that the petitioner has
disobeyed the order promulgated by a public
servant. Thus, prima facie from bare reading
of the impugned first information report no
offence is made out under Section 420/188
I.P.C.

Similarly, mere alleged failure to
show the invoices to the informant Sub
Inspector at the time of interception of the
vehicle and without presence of any of the
ingredients of an offence under Section 63
of the Copy Right Act, the allegation of
commission of offence under Section 63 is
prima facie not made out.

Prima facie the impugned first
information report appears to be malicious
and grave abuse of power by the informant
Sub Inspector i.e. respondent no. 3. If the
goods were not accompanied by proper
documents for transportation, it is only the
authorities under the U.P. Goods and
Service Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and
Service Tax Act, 2017 and I.C.S.T. Act,
2017, as the case may be, are empowered
to check and take action in accordance
with law, as provided under the relevant
Acts and Rules. But the police has no
authority to check invoices etc. and
accounting
the
goods
during
transportation.

The impugned first information
report, on the very face of it, prima facie,
reflects ill intention of the informant and
obstruction in free flow of trade and
commerce.

The Petitioner has filed copy of
tax invoices of Divya Chemicals, M/s
Sijariya
Traders
and
D.C.
Trading
Company as Annexure-2 to the writ
petition. If these tax invoices suffer from
any irregularity or infirmity, it is the tax
authority under GST Act to look into and
take action in accordance with law,
including seizure of the goods under
Section 129 of the U.P. GST/CGST Act.

Let a counter affidavit be filed by
the respondents by means of a personal
affidavit of Superintendent of Police,
Jalaun within three days. In his counter
affidavit, the respondents shall also show
cause that in the event the impugned first
information
report,
lodged
by
the
informant-respondent
no.
3
(Sub
Inspector), is found to be malicious and
abuse of power, then why exemplary cost
may not be imposed upon respondent no. 3,
to be recovered from his personal assets. If
the Superintendent of Police, Jalaun finds
that wrong has been committed by the Sub
Inspector (respondent no. 3), then before
filing his affidavit, he may take appropriate
action in accordance with law.

Put up as a fresh case on
18.08.2021 at 10.00 a.m.
358 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

Considering
the
facts
and
circumstances of the case, as an interim
measure it is provided that till the next date
fixed, the petitioner shall not be arrested
pursuant to the impugned first information
report.

Order Dated 24.08.2021

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava,
learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.C.
Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate
General assisted by Sri Shiv Kumar Pal,
learned Government Advocate and Sri
Rishi Chadhdha, learned AGA for the
State-respondents.

A
personal
affidavit
dated
23.8.2021 of Sri Avanish Kumar Awasthi,
Additional
Chief
Secretary,
Home,
Government of UP and a personal affidavit
dated 24.8.2021 of Sri Ravi Kumar,
Superintendent of Police, Jalaun, have
been filed today, which are taken on
record.

We have confronted learned
Additional Advocate General with the
orders dated 13.8.2021 and 18.8.2021 and
contents of the aforesaid two affidavits filed
today by the respondent no. 1 and 4
respectively and we are constrained to
observe that misleading affidavits have
been filed by respondent nos. 1 and 4 both.

Despite our repeated orders, the
respondents are not able to show their
authority to interfere with the movement of
goods in the normal course of business.
They have also not been able to show the
commission of any cognizable offence
under Indian Penal Code or under any
other criminal law as well as their
authority to register the impugned FIR with
respect to the goods in question.

For
the
detailed
reasons
mentioned in our earlier orders dated
13.8.2021 and 18.8.2021, it appears that
there have been no change in the approach
of respondents authorities to protect their
gross
illegal,
arbitrary
and
unconstitutional action. Consequently, this
Court is left with no option except to direct
the respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4 to remain
personally present before this Court,
tomorrow
to
show
cause
that
why
appropriate orders, adverse to them, may
not be passed and why the exemplary cost
may not be imposed.

Let the policy of 'Ease of Doing
Business'
be
also
produced
by
the
Additional
Chief
Secretary,
Home,
tomorrow.

Put up tomorrow i.e. 25.8.2021 at
10.00 a.m., as fresh for further hearing."

3. In compliance to our order dated
24.08.2021, Sri Avanish Kumar Awasthi,
Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Sri
Ravi Kumar, Superintendent of Police and
Sri Kedar Singh, Sub-Inspector, P.S.
Nadigaon, District Jalaun, are personally
present in court.

4. The Additional Chief Secretary and
Superintendent of Police stated before this
court through the learned Additional
Advocate General that charge-sheet has
been expunged and now a final report in
relation to the impugned first information
report has been submitted and, therefore,
no cause of action survives in the present
writ petition.

5. The Additional Chief Secretary
(Home) and the Superintendent of Police,
both have separately filed their personal
affidavits today, which are taken on record.
In paragraphs 7 to 14 of his personal
affidavit, the Additional Chief Secretary
(Home), has stated as under:

"7.
That
there
are
certain
developments, which are being brought on
9 All. Vishal Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
359
record by means of the present personal -
affidavit.

8. That the deponent tenders his
unconditional
and
unfettered
apology
before
this
Hon'ble
Court
for
the
inconvenience caused to this Hon'ble
Court, though the same was inadvertent.

9.
That
vide
order
dated
24.08.2021, the Superintendent of Police,
Jalaun has passed suspension order by
which the Sub-Inspector, namely Kedar
Singh has been put under suspension in
contemplation of departmental inquiry. It
is relevant to submit that Kedar Singh was
the first informant of case crime no.0015 of
2021 under section 420, 188 IPC and
section 63 of Copy Right Act, Police
Station Nadigaon, District Jalaun.

10. That it is further submitted
that vide order dated 24.08.2021, the
Superintendent of Police, Jalaun has also
passed
a
suspension
order
in
contemplation of departmental inquiry
against Sub-Inspector, namely Mr. Dinesh
Kumar
Giri.
The
abovenamed
SubInspector was the investigating officer of
case crime no. 15 of 2021 under sections
420; 188 IPC and section 63 of Copy Right
Act, Police Station Nadigaon, District
Jalaun.

11.
That
vide
order
dated
24.08.2021 passed by the Superintendent of
Police, Jalaun, the Incharge Inspector (the
then SHO of police station Nadigaon),
namely Roop Krishna Tripathi, has also
been suspended in contemplation of the
departmental inquiry.

12.
That
Vide
order
dated
24.08.2021 passed by the Superintendent of
Police, Jalaun, the investigation of case
crime no. 15 of 2021 under sections 420,
188 IPC and section 63 of Copy Right Act
has been transferred to the Circle Officer
City, namely Mr. Santosh Kumar.

13. That Mr. Santosh Kumar,
Circle Officer City, district Jalaun, has
submitted
a
report
before
the
Superintendent
of
Police,
Jalaun
recommending therein that the charge
sheet dated 16.06.2021 may be cancelled.
The Superintendent of Police, Jalaun
after going through the report, has
permitted the cancellation of the charge
sheet dated 16.06.2021 submitted in case
crime no. 15 of 2021 under sections 420,
188 IPC and section 63 of Copy Right Act
lodged at police station Nadigoan, district
Jalaun.

14. That the Circle Officer City,
district Jalaun has submitted final report
bearing final report no. 01 of 2021 dated
24.08.2021 in case crime no. 15 of 2021
under sections 420, 188 IPC and section 63
of Copy Right Act registered at police
station Nadigaon, district Jalaun."

6. In his personal affidavit, the
Superintendent of Police, Jalaun has also
made averments similar to the averments
made by the Additional Chief Secretary in
his personal affidavit.

7. During the course of submissions,
the Additional Chief Secretary (Home)
through the learned Additional Advocate
General, has produced a note on "Ease of
Doing Business" policy but perusal thereof
shows that no step has yet been taken by
the State Government to protect trade,
commerce and industry from grossly
illegal, unauthorised or unconstitutional
actions of government officers/ employees
at all level, particularly at the ground level.
If steps in this regard are taken by the State
Government then it may prove to be a boon
for the policy of "Ease of Doing Business,"
economy of the State and job opportunities
to people, on one hand and on the other
360 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
hand it may strengthen public faith in the
Rule of Law.

8. Since in relation to the impugned
first information report, a final report has
been submitted as stated in the aforequoted paragraphs of the personal affidavit
of the Additional Chief Secretary (Home),
therefore, we do not find any good reason
to proceed further in the matter. Therefore,
the writ petition is disposed off with the
direction
that
the
Additional
Chief
Secretary (Home) shall take all necessary
steps to ensure that police authorities may
not act without authority of law and may
not interfere with the movement of goods
in the ordinary course of business except by
authority of law and the policy of the State
Government "Ease of Doing Business" is
implemented in letter and spirit. The
respondent No.1 and 4 shall ensure that the
departmental proceedings initiated against
the erring officers as stated in the
aforequoted paragraphs of the affidavit of
Additional Chief Secretary (Home), are
concluded in accordance with law within
THREE MONTHS.

9. Personal presence of all the aforenoted officers, is exempted.

10. With the aforesaid directions, the
writ petition is disposed off.
----------
(2021)09ILR A360
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 22.09.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

FAFO No. 296 of 2003

Smt. Manju Yadav ...Appellant
Versus
Union of India ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Pritish Kumar

Counsel for the Respondent:
Mahendra Kumar Misra

Railway Act, 1989 - Sections 123 & 129 -
Claim
of
compensation
rejected-on
ground of suicide being committed by
the deceased-as journey ticket absentmere absence of journey ticket-will not
negate the claim of bonafide passengereye witness account and affidavit by
claimant-deceased
a
bonafide
passenger-no divine camera to indicate
the actual manner of fatality-inexorable
conclusion of untoward train accident
u/s 123 of Railways Act-compensation
in terms of section 129 of the Railway
Act, 1989. Amount enhanced.

Appeal partly allowed. (E-9)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Manish Mathur, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Shantanu Gupta,
learned counsel holding brief for Mr.
Pritish
Kumar,
learned
counsel
for
appellant and Mr. Mahendra Kumar
Mishra, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent.

2. First appeal from order has been
filed under Section XXIII of the Railway
Claims Tribunal Act,1987 against the
judgment and award dated 16.12.2002
passed in Claim Case No.0A0100204 (Smt.
Manju Yadav Vs. Union of India) whereby
claim of appellant has been rejected on the
ground that death of predecessor-in-interest
of the claimants has occurred on account of
suicide having been committed by him and
is thus not liable for compensation in terms
of Section 124-A of the Railways Act
1989.