Madhu Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4949 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Madhu Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. ... on 12 February, 2025

Author: Vivek Chaudhary

Bench: Vivek Chaudhary

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8943-DB
 
Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1251 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Madhu Pandey And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Pandey,Jagriti Bardhan Rao,Prabhat Narayan Srivastava,Rajneesh Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Jaiswal,Shubhra Sahai,Vijay Kumar Dwivedi
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
 

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, SriDharmendra Jaiswal and Sri Shubhra Sahai opposite parties and Sri Vijay Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the caveator and perused the record.

2. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0006 of 2025, for the offence under Sections 115 (2), 191 (2), 324 (4), 329 (4), 351 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), registered at Police Station- Gomti Nagar Extension, District- Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 him, which is against the mandates of Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) 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.

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

6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and the law as laid down by Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra).

[Brij Raj Singh, J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

Order Date :- 12.2.2025

Anuj Singh