Kunwar Pal Singh vs State Of Up And 3 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 36585 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Kunwar Pal Singh vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 7 November, 2024

Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:174746-DB
 
Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17735 of 2024
 

 
Petitioner :- Kunwar Pal Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Mangal Singh,Sarveshwar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
 

Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State respondent and perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition is preferred to quash the FIR dated 05.09.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 475 of 2024, under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. read with section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S. Hasanpur, District Amroha.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner who is working as Kanungo in Tehsil Hasanpur, District Amroha and he has no criminal antecedent and till date department has not proceeded in the matter and the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged just to harass the petitioner. He further submitted that offences, complained of, are punishable only up to seven years and therefore, before effecting the arrest of the petitioners, specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 be strictly complied with in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments.

4. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses cognizable offences against the petitioner and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted.

5. However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in the impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to seven years, therefore, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned FIR, it is directed that the respondents/ authorities shall ensure that the specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 as well as the directions issued in judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147, be strictly complied with.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 7.11.2024

Bhanu