Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3829 (UTT)

GURMEL SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/212/2025 · 2025-03-12

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.212 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. M.K. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Bhaskar Ch. Joshi, learned AGA with Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned B.H. for the State. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has impugned the FIR No.104 of 2025 dated 28.02.2025 lodged under Section 351(3) and 352 of B.N.S. registered at P.S. Rudrapur, Distt. U.S. Nagar. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 351(3) and 352 of BNS, 2023 carries a punishment maximum to seven years, therefore before resorting to any arrest, 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 petitioner. 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.) 12.03.2025 R.Dang