Allowed

Vinod Kumar Saroj v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2021CRLP/8267/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and prohibition of arrest. Applicable Section 41-A Cr.P.C. guidelines were held applicable, and the petition was allowed based on a previous judgment.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of applying the guidelines of the cited judgment, implying the prayers for quashing of FIR and prohibition of arrest were granted.

Vinod Kumar Saroj Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8267 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Saroj Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar,Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers :-

¶6

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned FIR dated 02.09.2021 in Case Crime No. 0658 of 2021, under Sections 452, 354 (Kha), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Nawabganj, District - Prayagraj .

¶7

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the FIR dated 02.09.2021 in Case Crime No. 0658 of 2021, under Sections 452, 354 (Kha), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Nawabganj, District - Prayagraj ."

¶8

The submission is that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment of seven years, therefore the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been wrongly implicated and could not be arrested. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the judgement of this Court dated 28.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 others vs. State of UP and 3 others) in which guidelines have been framed following the judgement of the Apex Court in different cases, relating to offences providing punishment of seven years or less.

¶9

We have gone through the impugned first information report and we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by this Court in the above noted judgement are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.

¶10

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms of judgement dated 28.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17732 of 2020 Vimal Kumar and 3 others vs. State of UP and 3 others.

¶11

Order Date :- 28.9.2021/vkg

Vinod Kumar Saroj v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar Saroj v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Julka and 2 Others Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Taufiq Ahmad @ Guddu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nisha Alias Uzma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neelam Bagga and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Vijma @ Barkha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Uma Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others