Satpal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 5358 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Satpal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 21 February, 2025

Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25553-DB
 
Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2215 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Satpal And 2 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pratik Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
 

Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

1. Advocates are abstaining from judicial work. Learned AGA is present.

2. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the FIR dated 28.12.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 0577 of 2024, under Sections 318(2), 316(2), 352, 351(2), 115(2) B.N.S. 2023, Police Station Teelamod, District Trans Hindon (Commissionerate Ghaziabad), but when the matter has been taken up, learned AGA has 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.

3. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses cognizable offences against the petitioners 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.

4. 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 petitioners 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.

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

(Prashant Kumar,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)

Order Date :- 21.2.2025

A.K.Srivastava