Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39285-DB Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4705 of 2025 Petitioner :- Km. Jyoti Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Suraj Kumar Singh Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Suraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the First Information Report dated 05.09.2024, registered as Case Crime No. 264 of 2024, under Sections- 420, 468, 471, 120-B and 467 of IPC, Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Petitioner along with another co-accused Laxmi Tiwari were granted protection in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17304 of 2024 by the following order dated 25.10.2024.:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the FIR dated 5.9.2024 registered as Case Crime No.264 of 2024 under Section 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, Distt. Muzaffar Nagar, 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 petitioners, specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/ Section 35 (3) to 35 (7) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 be strictly complied with in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments. 3. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses cognizable offences against the petitioners 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. 4. 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 petitioners 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 Nagrika 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. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently further implication of the petitioner has been made under Section 467 I.P.C. by the investigating officer only to negate the effect of the earlier order passed by this Court. 5. Sri Suraj Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no. 3 informs that charge sheet has been submitted against other co- accused and since the petitioner is not responding hence investigation has not been concluded as yet. 6. Petition is disposed of with the observation that till the cognizance is taken on the police report submitted by the investigating officer before the court concerned the petitioner shall not be arrested, provided he co-operates with the investigation. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Israr Digitally signed by :- ISRAR AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad