CHHATRAPAL v. THE STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME AND 3 OTHERS
CRLP/191/2025 · 2025-01-20
Om Prakash Shukla, Vivek Chaudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 115891 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 115891 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3452-DB
Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 191 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chhatrapal Respondent :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Samrat Gupta,Nikhil Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
2. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 06.11.2024, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0516 of 2024, for the offence under Sections 191 (2), 115 (2), 309 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), registered at Police Station Mohanlalganj, district Lucknow.
3. Learned AGA, on instructions, states that during investigation, Section 309 (4) has been dropped and Sections 351 (2), 352 B.N.S. and Sections 3 (1) (da), (dha), 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act have been added. A charge-sheet in this regard has also been prepared on 07.01.2025 but the same has not been submitted before the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in F.I.R. have maximum punishment for the
term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest him, which is against the mandates of Code of Criminal Procedure.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) shall be strictly followed in terms of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a case reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273: Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another.
6. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that let this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and the law as laid down by Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). . (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.) Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Ajit Digitally signed by :- AJIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench