Allahabad High Court
/8935/2025 of SHATISH PANDEY Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND OTHERS on 4 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8935 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the respondents-State. 2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8935 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the respondents-State.
2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR No.073 of 2025 under Sections 331(4) and 305(e) B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, Bahraich.
3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that from a perusal of the allegations made in the FIR, it emerges that a theft had taken place in a bank per which the thieves took away the chest and the DVR.
4. The contention is that the petitioner has unnecessarily been roped in the said FIR and authorities are harassing him on the pretext of the impugned FIR.
5. Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions received from Shri Daddan Singh, Sub Inspector, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, Bahraich dated 23.09.2025 states that three persons have been arrested on 05.03.2025. Subsequent thereto, a recovery of approximately Rs.4.95 Lakh has been effected from the arrested persons. The petitioner has been named on the basis of confessional statement of one of the arrested persons but no recovery has been effected till date from the petitioner. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vineet Kumar Chaurasia, Suresh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shatish Pandey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
6. Learned A.G.A. also states that investigation is still going on.
7. Considering the aforesaid more particularly when the petitioner is not named in the FIR, three persons have been arrested and on whose statement the authorities are trying to arrest the petitioner and admittedly no recovery has been effected from the petitioner till date as such the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent authorities not to take any coercive action against the petitioner till filing of a charge- sheet/final report.
8. Needless to mention that the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation failing which he would not be entitled to the benefit of this order. December 4, 2025 prateek CRLP No. 8935 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench