Disposed

Ali Alias Ishtikhar Alis and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2022CRLP/18112/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and direction not to arrest petitioners charged with offences under IPC Sections 406 and 420. The Court held that given the nature of offences and applicable guidelines, the matter did not require order regarding arrest procedure.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of based on cited judgments and guidelines.

Ali Alias Ishtikhar Alis and Another Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18112 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Ali Alias Ishtikhar Alis And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Milind Sen Bauddha,Manoj Kumar Verma

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents.

¶7

Present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the FIR dated 24.08.2022, being Case Crime/FIR No. 157 of 2022, under Sections 471, 468, 467, 406, 420 IPC, P.S. Mandawali, District Bijnor and for a direction to respondents not to arrest the petitioners pursuant to aforesaid FIR.

¶8

The First Information Report has been challenged on the ground that there was registered agreement wherein the informant had received certain amount from the accused. The said amount has been paid to the petitioners and the petitioners has received the amount in lieu of the said agreement. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions has apprised the Court that as per C.D.-11 dated 02.11.2022, during investigation Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC has already been dropped and investigation is in progress under Sections 420, 406 IPC.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. submitted that punishment for the offence under Sections 406, 420 IPC is less than 07 years, therefore, the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 41A Cr.P.C. 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.

¶10

The investigating agencies and their officers are duty bound to comply with the mandate of Section 41 and 41A of the Code and the directions issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273. Any dereliction on their part has to be

¶11

brought to the notice of the higher authorities by the court followed by appropriate action. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception has been well recognised through the repetitive pronouncements of the Apex Court, which is on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India (Ref. Nikesh Tarachand Shah v. Union of India, (2018) 11 SCC 1. This provision mandates the police officer to record his reasons in writing while making the arrest. Thus, a police officer is duty-bound to record the reasons for arrest in writing. The consequence of non-compliance with Section 41 shall certainly inure to the benefit of the person suspected of the offence. On the scope and objective of Section 41 and 41A, it is obvious that they are facets of Article 21 of the Constitution. The same has been elaborately dealt with in paragraphs 7.1 to 12 of the judgment in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra).

¶12

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.

¶13

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in view of the judgments cited above.

¶14

Order Date :- 2.12.2022 ML

¶15

Digitally signed by MUNNA LAL Date: 2022.12.02 16:26:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ali Alias Ishtikhar Alis and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Alias Ishtikhar Alis and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shambhu Yadav Vs Union of India and 6 Others

Virat Singh @ Sani Singh Rathor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hetram Mittal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gaurav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shivam and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Smt. Mariyam Khatoon @ Sapna and 3 Others Vs State of U P and 2 Others