Allahabad High Court
Rajaram And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 19 July, 2023
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi, Mohd. Azhar Idrisi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144193-DB
Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11129 of 2023
Petitioner :- Rajaram And 4 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Chandra Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are assailing the legality and validity of FIR dated 18.06.2023, registered as Case Crime No.184 of 2023, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325, 380 I.P.C., P.S.- Ghazipur, District Fatehpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the the F.I.R. is lodged with inordinate delay on 18.6.2023 for the alleged incident took place on 24.3.2023 and the allegations made in the F.I.R. are with malafide intention and after exaggerating the incident. Nonetheless, all the offences are punishable up to 7 years or less than 7 years.
The Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 has laid down guidelines for arresting a person, which are being reproduced herein below :
"Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorise detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction:
All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Cr.P.C.;
All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);
The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;
The Magistrate while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorise detention;
The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.
Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.
We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine."
Taking into account the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the ratio laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), the freedom of the petitioners is protected, provided if the I.O. of the case gives notice to them as provided under Sections 41 and 41(A) of Cr.P.C. and summons the petitioners in this case, petitioners are obliged to render their fullest cooperation in the investigation.
It is made clear that if some credible material is brought on record during investigation against the petitioners, then only the I.O. of the case after recording its reason may affect the arrest of the petitioners, strictly adhering to the guidelines provided in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is also directed that the I.O. of the case shall gear up the investigation and conclude the same preferably within a period of 60 days from today and submit its report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. in the court of concerned Magistrate.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 19.7.2023
M. Kumar
