Juhi Kashyap And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 36488 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Juhi Kashyap And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 6 November, 2024

Author: Vivek Chaudhary

Bench: Vivek Chaudhary

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73166-DB
 
Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6477 of 2024
 
Petitioner :- Juhi Kashyap And Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra,Nishant Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shivendra Shivam Singh Rathore
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
 

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Shivendra Shivam Singh Rathore, learned counsel for opposite party no.4.

2. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 10.6.2024, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.160 of 2024, for the offence under Sections 120(B), 406, 420, 504 & 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow.

3. It is stated by learned counsel for the parties that mediation between them has failed and learned counsel for opposite party no.4 has also returned the demand draft of Rs.6,00,000/- to learned counsel for the petitioners today in Court, which has been duly accepted by learned counsel for the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the offences as alleged in F.I.R. have maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest them, which is against the mandates of Code of Criminal Procedure. He prays that the petitioners may be extended the benefit of Section 41A Cr.P.C. (Now 35(3) of BNSS, 2023).

5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no.4 have no objection to the same.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent State has also given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. (Now Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023) shall be strictly followed in terms of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a case reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273: Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another.

7. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioners states that let this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.

8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. (Now Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023) and the law as laid down by Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra).

.

[Om Prakash Shukla,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

Order Date :- 6.11.2024

Sachin