Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.


Allahabad High Court
Alok Srivastava,Occuper Bajaj … vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home & Ors. on 29 January, 2010
Court No. - 28

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 749 of 2010

Petitioner :- Alok Srivastava,Occuper Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar & Ind.Ltd.&
O
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Rajesh Tewari
Respondent Counsel :- G.A.,K.S. Pawar

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh,J.

Hon’ble Yogendra Kumar Sangal,J.

Power filed today on behalf of the petitioners by Shri Gaurava Bhatia, is
taken on record.

Appearance has also been put in on behalf of the first informant i.e. opposite
party no. 4. Learned AGA is present for respondent nos. 1,2 & 3.

Let counter and rejoinder affidavits be exchanged before the next date which
is being fixed herein below.

On the request of the learned counsel for the first informant, it is directed
that by means of supplementary affidavit, Bank’s statement of Sugar Factory
concerned relating to the period of current crushing season as on today
pertaining to Sugarcane price be filed within two weeks by the petitioners.

From perusal of the material on record, it comes out that broadly speaking
following points are involved :

1. That sugarcane has been purchased from the place other than the stipulated
place.

2. That part payment has been made in cash in stead of by means of cheques.

3. That no residual commission has been paid to the Sugarcane Cooperative
Societies.

4. That payment which has been made to the farmer, has been shown to be
loan amount and on that pretext no actual payment has been made to the
farmers.

There does not appears to be any quarrel that the aforesaid points are also
involved in almost all the 45 FIRs which have been challenged at Allahabad
High Court as well as some of the FIRs which have been challenged in this
Court.

Concededly all the writ petitions pending in the Allahabad Hihg Court have
been clubbed and the matter has been fixed for 8th March, 2010 for final
hearing. As an interim measure, the arrest has also been stayed.

In view of the above, let this writ petition be also clubbed with the similar
writ petition nos.

(1) Writ Petition No. 425 (M/B) of 2010.

(2) Writ Petition No. 640 (M/B) of 2010.

(3) Writ Petition No. 641 (M/B) of 2010.

which have been filed earlier in this court and all such petitions be fixed on
11.03.2010 for final hearing.

Keeping in view, the principle of parity, there does not appears to be any
good ground to deprive the petitioners from getting the same interim order
which has been passed at Allahabad High Court in writ petitions of similar
nature as mentioned herein above. Therefore, as an interim measure, it is
provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioners shall not be arrested in
the case crime number 18 of 2010, under Sections 420/418/120-B IPC, & 3/7
of E.C. Act, Police Station Utraula, district Balrampur subject to their full
cooperation in the investigation which shall go on.

Order Date :- 29.1.2010
Kaushal


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

100 queries in 0.179 seconds.