Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4711 (UTT)

KESHAV MITTAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/262/2025 · 2025-04-16

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 JUDGES’S ORDERS WPCRL No.262 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Manish Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner is present. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned AGA and Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State are present. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has impugned the FIR No.0294 of 2024 dated 15.11.2024, lodged under Sections 316(2), 351(2) & 352 of B.N.S., 2023 registered at P.S. Khanpur, District Haridwar. 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 alleged against the petitioner carry 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.) 16.04.2025 AK