Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9853-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1318 of 2025 Petitioner :- Niyamat Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Iqbal Ahmad,Mohd. Kumail Haider Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the State-opposite parties no.1 to 3. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by commanding the opposite party no.3 to stop the unnecessary harassment of petitioner. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to consider and decide his representation letter dated 27.01.2025 contained in Annexure No.5. (iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to conduct a thorough inquiry in this matter and take appropriate action against the erring officer." 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that complainant had lodged FIR No.277 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 352, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station Utraula, District Balrampur, wherein after investigation, charge sheet was filed on 25.01.2024 only against Babu Raja under Sections 420, 406, 352, 504 and 506 IPC. Name of the petitioner was dropped during the course of investigation by the Investigating Officer. Now, the complainant/opposite party no.4 has moved a fresh application before the police station concerned and the police are harassing the petitioner, who came to Balrampur from Saudi Arabia only in January, 2025. 4. Learned AGA has produced before this Court the instructions dated 13.02.2025 sent by Santosh Kumar Singh, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Kotwai Utraula, District Balrampur, wherein the facts as mentioned in the writ petition, have not been disputed. However, it has been submitted that opposite party no.4 Reshma Bano has made fresh allegation regarding the Visa/Passport by moving an application on 20.01.2025 and only for the purposes of inquiry, the petitioner was called to the police station along with the complainant. The police is not harassing the petitioner in any manner and he had been asked to come to the police station so that the inquiry made in the fresh application is properly dealt with by the police. 5. Instructions are kept on record. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for issuing a direction to the police authorities to follow the mandate of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 41A Cr.P.C.) for the reason that the offences mentioned in the impugned First Information Report carry the sentence of upto seven years of imprisonment. 7. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with the direction to the police authorities concerned to follow the mandate of Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Section 41A Cr.P.C.) and also the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. . (Brij Raj Singh, J.) (Sangeeta Chandra, J.) Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Rao/- Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench