Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2623 of 2025 Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar @ Pappu And 4 Other Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Other Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Prajapati,Mahesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Nand Kishor Mishra Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned First Information Report dated 28.12.2024 registered as Case Crime No.0163 of 2024 Under Section 191(2), 191 (3), 109, 309 (6), 352, 351 (3) of B.N.S, 2023, Police Station Chikasi, District Hamirpur and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report. Order regarding Petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 5:- 3. Prayer made in the writ petition to quash the impugned First Information Report need not be examined on merits in view of the statement made by learned A.G.A. that investigation has already concluded in the matter with submission of charge-sheet on 18.01.2025. The chargesheet is otherwise not under challenge. 4. Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 5 do not want to press the writ petition and the same may be dismissed as not pressed. 5. Consequently, the writ petition, insofar as it pertains to petitioner Nos. 1, 2, and 5, stands dismissed as not pressed. Needless to say, if petitioner Nos. 1, 2, and 5 are aggrieved, they may avail the remedy as available in law. Order regarding Petitioner Nos.3 and 4:- 6. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the impugned FIR but when the matter has been taken up, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that offences, complained of, are punishable only up to seven years and therefore, before effecting the arrest of the petitioner Nos.3 and 4, specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/ Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 be strictly complied with in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments. 7. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses cognizable offences against the petitioner Nos.3 and 4 and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted. 8. However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in the impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to seven years, therefore, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioner Nos.3 and 4 in pursuance of the impugned FIR, it is directed that the respondents/ authorities shall ensure that the specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/ Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 as well as the directions issued in judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147, be strictly complied with. 9. Accordingly, in light of the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of with respect to petitioner Nos. 3 and 4. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 NLY Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad