Petitioner sought quashing of an F.I.R. and a direction not to arrest, relying on Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and Apex Court guidelines. The court disposed of the petition, finding those guidelines applicable to the facts.
Disposed of the instant petition in light of the judgments in Arnesh Kumar and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 13795 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ramhari And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhat Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J. Hon'ble Syed Waiz Mian,J.
Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 21.5.2022 registered as Case Crime No.0165 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
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 petitioner has been wrongly implicated and could not be arrested. Reliance has been placed on the judgement of Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017 and co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147 .
We have gone through the impugned first information report and we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgements are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.
Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in the light of the judgments as noted above.
Order Date :- 29.9.2022 S.Prakash
Digitally signed by SHASHI PRAKASH Date: 2022.09.30 10:48:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether guidelines in Arnesh Kumar and Social Action Forum require non-arrest of the petitioner before arrest is issued under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. in the facts of the present case?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273Explained¶7
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015Explained¶7
Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No
Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 othersReferred¶7
Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Ramhari And Another
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Suneet Kumar
Syed Waiz Mian
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
