The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea by Vinay Pathak, the Vice Chancellor of Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University in Kanpur, seeking quashing of an FIR lodged against him in a corruption case.
In its order, a Lucknow bench of the high court said that the FIR and material brought on record before it disclosed the commission of cognisable offences and Pathak could not be given protection from arrest by the Special Task Force (STF), which is probing the matter.
The bench of justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Vivek Kumar Singh, however, said, that its observations would not adversely affect the proceedings in the lower court. Pathak can approach it for anticipatory bail and the plea should be expeditiously decided, the high court said.
Pathak had challenged the FIR lodged against him for allegedly taking a commission of Rs 1.41 crore in order to clear the bill of a private company. The high court had completed its hearing on his plea on November 9.
“The bare perusal of the allegations of the FIR and the pieces of evidence which are said to have been collected during the investigation, prima facie disclose commission of cognisable offences, we are not inclined to quash the FIR,” the bench said on Tuesday while citing a verdict of Supreme Court.
It, however, clarified that the investigating agency and the lower court concerned would not be adversely affected by the observations made in the ruling.
The high court also said that Pathak can approach the lower court seeking anticipatory bail and ”if such a plea is moved, it would be decided expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to any party”.
The FIR was registered at Indira Nagar police station based on an October 29 complaint by one David Mario Denis under IPC sections 342 (wrongful confinement), 386 (extortion), 504 (intentional insult) and 506 (criminal intimidation) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Pathak contended that there was no offence made out against him in the FIR and that he cannot be arrested without prosecution sanction in the corruption case.
It was submitted on behalf of the state government and the complainant that since the FIR prima facie disclosed commission of serious offences, it cannot be quashed.
It was also added that taking a bribe was not an act in the discharge of his official duty and hence there was no need for prosecution sanction before arresting Pathak. Accepting the pleas of the state and the complainant, the bench dismissed the petition of Pathak.
Read all the Latest Education News here
Comments
0 comment