Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3629 (UTT)

POORAN SHARMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/172/2025 · 2025-03-07

Pankaj Purohit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.172 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA along with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal and Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have impugned the FIR No.0040 of 2024 dated 28.11.2024, under Sections 21 & 4 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957 and Sections 221, 238, 318 (4) & 61 (2) of BNS, registered with Police Station Kalsi, District Dehradun. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his argument to the extent that the investigation agency should comply with the guidelines given in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. 5. Since the offences under Sections 21 & 4 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, 1957 and Sections 221, 238, 318 (4) & 61 (2) of BNS carries a punishment maximum to seven years, therefore before resorting to any arrest a prior notice under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) is necessary to be issued to the petitioners. Hence, it is provided that before taking any coercive measures against the petitioner, the Investigating Officer shall abide by procedure given under Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act, 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 07.03.2025 AK