Disposed

Ravindra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC10 May 2023CRLP/6365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of the criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR. Relying on Supreme Court guidelines regarding arbitrary arrests, the bench ruled that police must follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. procedures and dismissed the prayer to quash the writ.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without arrest. State directed to ensure compliance with Section 41-A Cr.P.C.

Ravindra Kumar Singh Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100520-DB

¶2

Court No. - 45

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6365 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Devendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A. for State respondents.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 5.4.2023 registered as Case Crime No. 118 of 2023, under Sections 408 I.P.C, P.S. Babugarh, District Hapur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶8

The submission is that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto 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 judgment 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 in Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 Others, 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 judgment are equally applicable to the facts of the instance case.

¶10

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

¶11

We, however, direct the learned A.G.A. to forward a copy of this order to the respondent no. 2-Superintendent of Police, Hapur to look into the contents of the first information report and the section under which (Section 408 IPC) has been registered as prima facie, the petitioner is a public servant in view of Section 21 of IPC being employee of IFFCO and therefore, he is required to look into the conduct of the persons registering the first information and if required take necessary action.

¶12

Order Date :- 10.5.2023 Lalit Shukla

¶13

Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravindra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Kumar Singh 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

Amit and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chandra Jeet Chauhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Rampal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Umashankar Rai and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Srinath Dhar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others