Allowed

Anil Kumar Tripathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Nov 2023CRLP/17764/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Division Bench allowed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and direction against arrest. The court applied Supreme Court guidelines on arrest procedures under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. for offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years and disposed of the petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Instant writ petition allowing the petitioners to approach police under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and disposed of in terms of Supreme Court judgments.

Anil Kumar Tripathi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:217348-DB

¶2

Court No. - 45

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17764 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Tripathi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Upadhyay,Sujeet Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Premnendra Singh, learned counsel for the informant whose Vakalatnama filed today is taken on record as well as Shri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.

¶7

The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 11.08.2023, registered as Case Crime No. 412 of 2023, under Section 406 and 507 IPC, P.S.Beeta-2, District Greater Noida(Commissionerate Gautam Buddha Nagar) and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.

¶8

The submission is that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years, therefore, 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. 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, Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 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.

¶9

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 judgement are equally applicable to the

¶10

facts of the instant case.

¶11

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms of the judgements as noted above.

¶12

Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Nitendra

¶13

Digitally signed by :- NITENDRA TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar Tripathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Tripathi and 2 Others 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

Keshav Kumar @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt Janki Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Daybar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others