The High Court disposed of the writ petition assailing an FIR. Applying Arnesh Kumar guidelines, the court granted freedom to petitioners pending investigation via notice/summons but directed investigation within 60 days.
Petitioners granted freedom pending notice under Cr.P.C. Investigation must be concluded within 60 days.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:181473-DB
Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20932 of 2024
Petitioner :- Jeet Lal And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Singh,Sonam Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ghazala Bano Quadri
Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
The Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 has laid down guidelines for arresting a person, which are being reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction:
All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Cr.P.C.;
All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);
The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;
The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention;
The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.
Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.
We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine."
protected, provided if the I.O. of the case gives notice to him as provided under Sections 41 and 41(A) of Cr.P.C. and summon the petitioners in this case, petitioners are obliged to render his fullest cooperation in the investigation.
Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Rohit
(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) (Siddharth, J.)
Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners in a criminal case punishable by less than seven years' imprisonment are entitled to freedom pending investigation under the guidelines of Arnesh Kumar.
What obligations the petitioner has to cooperate with the investigation if notice is served under Sections 41 and 41A of the Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar v. State of BiharRelied on¶9
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
MD. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of JharkhandRelied on¶20
MD. Asfak Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand and another, Criminal Appeal No. (S) 2207 of 2023
Jeet Lal And 5 Others
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others
Siddharth
Subhash Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
