Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1721 (ALL)

Krishan Kumar Singh (Dr. ) v. State of U. P.

2015-07-03

A.P.SAHI

body2015
JUDGMENT Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant has come up praying for quashing of the proceedings in Special Case No. 18 of 2013. However, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant has confined his prayer to the effect that the applicant is prepared to surrender before the court below and, therefore, he be granted some reasonable time to surrender in Special Case No.18 of 2013. 3. He has invited the attention to the order passed in the case of Sanjay Awasthi Vs. State of U.P. Application under Section 482 No.152 of 2015 where the following order was passed : - "Heard Sri Nandit K. Srivastava who prays that the proceedings be quashed in this matter arising out of Special Case No. 31 of 2014. The petitioner is admittedly a supplier of the medical items that has become subject matter of investigation where the allegations are that the medicines had been supplied on fake indents and on an exorbitant rates causing immense loss to the public exchequer. The case is of wide ramifications know as the NRHM Scam. The contention of Sri Srivastava is that the petitioner was not named in the FIR but the applicant's Firm, M/s V.S. Pharma was named in the FIR. The applicant has been arraigned as an accused on investigation and a chargesheet has been filed, the same is being described as a mechanical chargesheet. Having considered the submissions raised, such similar arguments had been advanced in respect of this wide spread scam in the case of Devendra Mohan Vs. State reported in 2013 (4) ADJ Pg. 620 where also the learned Single Judge of this court in the same matter refused to quash the chargesheet for the reasons given therein. In the opinion of the court, such reasons are directly available for refusing to grant any such relief in the present case as well. Sri Srivastava submits that the applicant deserves to be granted bail. For that the applicant has to surrender before the court below for which he is granted two weeks time. The application is rejected with the said observations. Order Date : - 16.1.2015" 4. In view of the limited prayer made before the Court and having heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the C.B.I., the applicant shall surrender before the court below for which he is granted two weeks time. The application is rejected with the said observations. Order Date : - 16.1.2015" 4. In view of the limited prayer made before the Court and having heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the C.B.I., the applicant shall surrender before the court below for which he is granted two weeks time. The application is rejected with the said observations.