Disposed

Ashutosh and 7 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024CRLP/21906/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR and direction against arrest. Relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding mandatory compliance with procedural safeguards before arrest, the court held that police must follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. since the offences were punishable up to seven years, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed applying Supreme Court guidelines; directed police to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C.; petitioners not to be arrested under this report.

Ashutosh and 7 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:188907-DB

¶2

Court No. - 42

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21906 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ashutosh And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajeet Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Ajeet Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Shashidhar Pandey, 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 2.7.2024, registered as Case Crime No. 281 of 2024, under sections 34, 308, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Raunapar, District-Azamgarh, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.

¶8

Although the prayer for quashing of FIR has been made, but without insisting on the same, only 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 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 and in 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 without interfering in the same, we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgement are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.

¶10

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms

¶11

of the judgements as noted above.

¶12

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 Faridul

¶13

Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashutosh and 7 Others v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh and 7 Others v. State of Up 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

Shubham vs State of Up and 2 Others

Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel University of Agriculture and Technology Meerut and Another vs State of Up and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Jaiswal and 4 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others

Amir and 3 Others vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Sachin Sharma and 2 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others

Shabana and 2 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others