Disposed

Ramesh Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2018CRLP/37230/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to quash the FIR on merits but directed police to comply with mandatory conditions for arrest under Sections 41(1)(b) and 41-A Cr.P.C. as per the Arnesh Kumar judgment, ineffective only if investigation concluded post order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR refused; direction to police to comply with arrest safeguards under S. 41(1)(b) and 41-A Cr.P.C.

Ramesh Singh and 3 Others Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 37230 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramesh Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the first information report dated 19.5.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 0223 of 2018, under Sections 147, 504, 506, 379 and 411 I.P.C. and Section 26 Indian Forest Act, police station Campearaganj, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the first information report lodged by the respondent no. 3 with the allegations that the petitioners after cutting green Sakhu tree illegally from the Bhaurabari Beat, brought the same at their house. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are vague and false. If the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners be taken in entirety and charges are found to be proved, the petitioners cannot be awarded sentence of more than 7 years. In this view, the arrest of the petitioners should not be effectuated by the police personnel.

¶8

Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not find any cogent and convincing reason to quash the first information report. The prayer for quashing the first information report is refused.

¶9

The fact of the matter is that till date arrest has not been effectuated and this is mere apprehension of the petitioners that they would be arrested in breach of provisions as contained under Section 41 (1) (b) read with Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. Once there is statutory provision provided for then it is always expected that the said provisions would be adhered to and in case

¶10

there is any violation of the same, complaint can also be made before the Magistrate concerned to remedy the situation.

¶11

In view of the above, it is hereby directed that in case arrest of petitioners is to be effectuated in the aforesaid case in which they are wanted, the concerned police personnel should deal with the matter in compliance of the provisions as contained under Section 41 (1) (b) read with Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. as per direction of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, 2014 Law Suit (SC) 518 .

¶12

It is further provided that if the investigation in this matter has been completed and police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has been filed, the petitioners shall not be entitled to any benefit of this order.

¶13

The writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Shahnawaz

Ramesh Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Tripathi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Waris Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sangeeta Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Bhartiya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Safayddin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others