Mohd. Arif and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners sought to quash an FIR and obtaint a stay on arrest under Section 41A Cr.P.C. relying on the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception for offences punishable with seven years or less.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition disposed of in view of cited judgments.
What the court decided
Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11864 of 2022
Petitioner :- Mohd. Arif And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hari Bans Singh,Yusuf Ali Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 25.06.2022 registered as Case Crime No.421 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Marriage) Act 2019, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Fatehpur, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
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 41A 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.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing FIR and direction not to arrest petitioners under Section 41A Cr.P.C. due to seven-year punishment ceiling should be allowed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mohd. Arif And 2 Others
- respondent
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Coram
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · September
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLP/11864/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court