Dismissed

Anjul Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2020CRLP/6573/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to quash the FIR against the petitioner under the Essential Commodities Act and IT Act. While the prayer to quash was denied, the petitioner is directed to ensure arrest proceedings comply with Section 41(1)(b) and 41-A Cr.P.C. in line with Arnesh Kumar, unless the investigation concludes with a police report.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash FIR denied; permission given to arrest in compliance with Sections 41(1)(b) and 41-A Cr.P.C. subject to termination if report filed.

Anjul Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6573 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Anjul Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aditya Prasad Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶5

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

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 21.12.2019 registered as Case Crime no.1055 of 2019, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act and Section 66 A Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed at the behest of the complainant. If the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner be taken in its entirety and charges are found to be proved, the petitioner cannot be awarded sentence of more than 7 years. In this view, the arrest of the petitioner should not be effectuated by the police personnel.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made in the first information report cannot be aborted at this stage. The petitioner will have sufficient opportunity to rebut the allegations.

¶9

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not find any cogent and convincing reason to quash the FIR, hence the prayer for quashing the FIR

¶10

is refused.

¶11

The fact of the matter is that till date arrest has not been effectuated and this is mere apprehension of the petitioner that he 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 there is any violation of the same, complaint can also be made before the Magistrate concerned to remedy the situation.

¶12

In view of the above, it is hereby directed that in case arrest of petitioner is to be effectuated in the aforesaid case in which he is 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. in the light of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar , (2014) 8 SCC 273 .

¶13

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 petitioner shall not be entitled to any benefit of this order.

¶14

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.7.2020 M. Tariq

Anjul Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjul Kumar 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

Kurban Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kiran Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mamta Yadav @ Soni and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jai Narayan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anas Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others