Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:37480-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14454 of 2024 Petitioner :- Salman And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Mishra,Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jai Prakash Prasad,Onkar Singh,Rakesh Yadav Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. In spite of the notice served upon the learned counsel for the petitioners, no one has turned up to press the instant matter. Sri Jai Prakash Prasad, learned counsel for the informant and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-1 are present. 2. Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-1 on the instructions states that during investigation Sections 376 and 377 have already been dropped against the petitioners and all the offences are below seven years. 3. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the FIR dated 02-06-2024 registered as Case Crime No. 224 of 2024 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P.A ct and 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar, but when the matter has been taken up, learned A.G.A.-1 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 17.3.2025 pks (Prashant Kumar, J.) (M.C. Tripathi, J.) Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad